[Discussion] Coordinape and Bounties


Last year we began using Coordinape in an effort to reward Metanauts who were contributing time and energy to activities that benefitted the protocol. While the initial few rounds had good activity, it seems like later rounds have significantly dropped off in overall opt-ins and amount of GIVE distributed.

I wanted to kick off a conversation about Coordinape, the Bounty board, and how we might iterate on these to come to a better solution that gets more engagement and promotes the community engaging with the minor tasks that the protocol needs completed.

I’ll start off with a couple of thoughts, others can kick in their own ideas, and we’ll see if some consensus shakes out.

I like Coordinape, and I think when linked explicitly to a relatively short sprint period it works well. I wish it would have a ‘feed’ where people could indicate what they were working on or what was completed during the epoch itself. Since that doesn’t seem to be present though, it’s really incumbent on participants to ‘be seen’ doing whatever they said they would be doing.

I wasn’t a fan of the month-long period the epoch was changed to, as it opens itself up to being something you can ‘put off’ and procrastinate on. With the short epochs you’re encouraged to opt-in quickly and get something done, else you miss out for that round. Further, short epochs encourage setting goals that are reasonably sized and are less likely to be delayed.

I read a lot of feelings about “I feel bad opting in because …[X]…” I’m sympathetic to core contributors and those employed by the DAO staying opted-out, but I think Metanauts generally should opt in every epoch. While you personally may not feel as though your contribution is meritorious, the actual point of Coordinape is to distribute based on perceived merit. We can’t do that if you don’t opt-in. :slight_smile:

We also have a bounty board that predated Coordinape and that doesn’t get a lot of attention (as far as I can tell). Coordinape participants are setting their own goals, while the board is the protocol saying “This is what we need done.” I think the presence and needs on the board need to be regularly emphasized somewhere.

So, what’s the intersection of the two?


Part of it is a matter of visibility. These sites are spread out across different domains.

Would it be possible to bring coordinape and the bounty page as a tab under governance in whatever the 2022 equivalent of an iframe is?


Thanks for kicking this discussion off @trustindistrust and I quite agree with the narrative here. I also strongly believe what @OliJ has mentioned contributed significantly to the current situation.

There is a lot of different pieces of information spread thin across the entire mStable ecosystem, and it has become more difficult over time to follow everything accordingly.

I’m personally a big fan of creating a community.mstable.org sub-domain and get everything into one place. For those that have been part of the Governance Call earlier this week, the mStable core contributor group is currently heavily engaged with the rollout of mStable v2, so I don’t think it’s realistic to ask for such a sub-page to be deployed anytime soon.

In the meantime, however, we should still try to find a way on how to get the board, Coordinape and other incentives aligned so it makes sense for an average Metanaut or community member to eventually go to this page and check in weekly to see what has been happening and find an easy way to subscribe to updates outside of Discord.

Furthermore, with our EPNS integration, we could also think of sending out more tailored messages to subscribers that are interested in the community/Metanaut aspect of mStable, and get them updated and active in this way.

Jaf from EPNS mentioned that there are call-to-action notifications available, so it could be made very simple for users to see and click when a new bounty or Coordinape round has begun.

Lastly, I definitely concur with the sentiment that ALL Metanauts should make themselves available for GIVE, and only core contributors opt-out, as they already get compensated via the grant funding year to year.

Very keen to hear a bit more around these ideas, and then create some actionable steps on how to actually roll this out in the coming weeks and months.

In the meantime, I have also reached out to Penguin to get the exact info on how these two avenues were administrated in the past, and then we can get everything aligned. With @Fungus on board as well now, we do have more capacity to regularly maintain these channels and also keep everyone updated more easily.

Great post @trustindistrust . Based on the sentiment from the (albeit limited) responses so far I arrived at a few takeaways: 1. Coordinape is still seen as valuable to the protocol 2. Part of the issue is fragmentation of these community sites 3. It’s difficult to know and track what Metanauts are doing 4. With mStable v2 on the horizon, a sub-domain that pulls this information together in one convenient place will not be possible in the near term.

With those points in mind, It sounds like we need both a near term solution with the resources we have available, and eventually a longer term one once v2 has successfully launched.

⦁ Near term this could be something as simple as creating a discord channel that I can facilitate where opt ins can discuss what is being worked on each epoch. Users can allocate GIVE accordingly based on this visibility and completion of goals. Ideally, It could also be an opportunity to bounce ideas off one another.

⦁ Longer term we could create a sub-domain as @mZeroNine discussed for easier tracking and bringing together all pertinent information to one easy to navigate location.

Regarding the bounty board. There are a lot of tasks that need completed across varying areas but to my knowledge none are given priority over any others. Perhaps we can set some goals and then prioritize these tasks based on what we are looking to accomplish and how it will strategically benefit mStable, particularly as we prep for the launch of v2.

I’m in favor of a discord channel (in as much as I’m in favor of more discord, which is ‘not really’ but that’s a discussion for another time lol) as a way to create a status feed. I’m hoping that seeing activity in the feed will draw others to opt-in and work on their stuff. OTOH, many will simply mute the channel.

Any thoughts on making the epochs shorter? It’s more of a pain for whomever is actually running the thing, but I feel like shorter epochs would help.

In that vein, what would we think about making a “Coordinape herder” paid position? The person would be responsible for adding and removing people as needed, running the disbursement on time at the end of the epoch, and cheerleading participation. I don’t know how ‘full’ the current DAO team is, but if anyone has bandwidth for it then perhaps it wouldn’t have to become another paid position. But it does clearly need someone to keep an eye on it.

I like this idea and would suggest having it as a header next to “Stats” as well as underneath “Deposit” and “Staking” on the homepage.

Thanks for kicking off this discussion trust. I’m currently handling the payment side of things and wouldn’t have a problem doing this more regularly if others agree that a short epoch makes sense (although we may need to look at payouts on Polygon as it could get inefficient gas-wise). The main thing for me is ensuring that there is a return on the investment of MTA into Coordinape. I agree that we need better systems and tools for keeping track of what work will add the most value and for making the work of community members visible.


If you’ve got payments and such under control @soulsby then I’m super okay with that. :raised_hands:


Alright, so for now it seems like

  • We need some information from Penguin, who is currently out of touch.
  • There seems to be support for a centralized domain where things can be quickly accessed
  • Leveraging EPNS or some other signaling that Metanauts would onboard to when choosing to participate in bounties/Coordinape.
  • Some method for Metanauts to provide updates about what they are working on and demonstrating progress towards completion. This would probably end up being discord, but it would be cool if the community domain/application had a ‘feed’ that people could easily post to that didn’t rely on something centralized like Discord (plus, lots of people mute channels, which negates the point.)

I’ll poke around a bit and see if I can’t find a clean solution to the last issue. If EPNS feeds could be embedded in the site, or if Metanauts could ‘direct’ their EPNS notifications at an address set up for this purpose, I think that would be the best solution off the top of my head.

Thanks Trust. What did we need to know from Penguin specifically? I have access to some limited notes that he left behind so can have look and see if I can dig anything up.

1 Like

Late to the party here. Thanks @trustindistrust for the post. I fully agree that shorter epochs make sense. Let’s make this more dynamic and gamified, with shorter timeframes and more clearly definite goals. Perhaps we would want to do payments on a monthly basis though to make @soulsby life easier if you are managing payments? Or does Coodinape do that automatically. The feed is also a good idea, are we using notion currently? Sorry for the ignorance here. Also keen to hear how much MTA is being used on this and see the tasks that are being completed. I’ve been a little separate from this but keen to get closer to it as I see that its a great mechanism for community members to support the protocol and be compensated for that support

1 Like

What did we need to know from Penguin specifically? I have access to some limited notes that he left behind so can have look and see if I can dig anything up.

From mzeronine

In the meantime, I have also reached out to Penguin to get the exact info on how these two avenues were administrated in the past, and then we can get everything aligned.

Hey James, thanks for dropping in. :slight_smile:

I think it’s correct that Coordinape epochs need not be exactly 1:1 with payouts, good catch.

Part of the issue at hand is that there is no feed of people’s activities in one place that won’t get muted, and so it’s difficult (when assigning GIVE) to determine whose goals for the epoch have been achieved. Still looking into possible solutions for this, open to suggestions. Optimally, it would be something that could be embedded in the one place everyone would know to go to monitor this stuff.

This info I don’t have at hand, sorry. I think @soulsby would be able to tell you. However, I would characterize the Coordinape (currently) as a way to acknowledge presence and effort in Discord rather than as a sprint-based “I’m going to do this specific thing over the next two weeks” style that (IMO) it should evolve towards.


Thanks for that info @trustindistrust !

I think the Coordinape Admin powers are with @soulsby so this is fine now I think, unless I am not seeing something. You got admin access to the Coordinape platform right Cam?

The remaining question is who is administering the Bounties Page/Board and keeping it up to date. Was this a community effort before or did someone from the core team regularly update the page?

With this said, I also think some form of consolidation between the Bounty / Coordinape initiative needs to happen eventually. I don’t know how dynamic Coordinape is, but can we “reserve” a certain (big) amount of GIVE to assign to bounties for each epoch?

Bigger bounties could span over multiple epochs and sort of serve as a milestone-based approach on delivery.

Maybe we can even have a dedicated Bounty-Coordinape instance next to our usual Coordinape with only the admin and the Bounty Collaborators and only the admin can hand out GIVE upon successful milestone reached/delivery? :thinking:

I like the idea of this. I think mechanically though, the way Coordinape works would get in the way. I think the amount of GIVE is fixed, and the disbursement at the end is a function of GIVE quantity and the total amount of MTA available. So to pay out, say, $100 USD for a bounty one epoch, might require 20 GIVE, but the next epoch it would be 24 GIVE (because the total MTA in the ‘bank’ dropped, so you need a larger fraction of GIVE to cover it). It would force the admin to do a lot of fiddling with it every payout. It also implicitly would limit the number of bounties that could be paid out in a given epoch unless the ‘bank’ were kept topped up.

So it might work, or it might be too painful to bother with. It would be great to put both things under one umbrella though.

I have access to Coodinape but I don’t know anything about the bounties page/board.

I think we should be careful about being to prescriptive in exactly what people are rewarded for through Coordinape; it is designed to allow the community to make subjective assessments of who is addi6ing value without limiting the ways that they might choose to do this.

I think specific bounties should probably be separate from this. Maybe we could look at something like dework.xyz if we want to offer rewards for defined pieces of work.

For the purposes of making Coordinape more valuable, our focus should be on offering ideas for what work would add value and improving transparency of what individuals have been working on.

The current budgeted allocation of MTA for Coordinape is 2,000 MTA per epoch (28 days), although the actual amount given previously seems to vary between 2k and 3k.

1 Like

That makes sense, good points Cam! I really like the idea of Dework and this seems like a strict improvement over the current Bounty Board (which no one seems to administrate any longer anyways).

I’d be keen to explore getting rid of the old Bounty Board, and recreating it instead on Dework, depending on costs and workloads required. Do you have any experience with Dework already @soulsby? :thinking:

Also curious to hear what the rest thinks of this idea, so we can start forming a more concrete way forward with this.

Regarding Coordinape, this is the outcome of the last epoch:

I believe we should do a little spring cleaning here as well, as I haven’t seen some of these names in our Discord in weeks or even months. I also believe maybe it’s worth exploring a process to remind players to allocate their give via a bot script, or if that’s too hard, I can also manually tag people in the channel :thinking:

Yeah, I think cleaning out the list of people who haven’t participated after a certain period of time would be prudent going forward.

As for the current list, maybe put up a discord message that if they want to be on this list as of now, they need to contribute during this round? That gives until the 30th for them to participate, which seems pretty reasonable to me.

At this stage, we might consider just offboarding Coordinape? We haven’t really successfully integrated it into our tools and I don’t think we can adjust it in such a way that it will be suddenly more useful.

We might just have to find something that works better for us and for our situation.