Annual Shimmer community treasury allocation disucssion.

As we start the New Year let’s discuss what comes in February! Treasury annual voting and elections.

Here is a short :thread::point_down:

TLDR: How much of the Shimmer Community Treasury should be allocated to the Tangle Community Treasury, and, what main focus should that funding be focused on?

Each year the community needs to decide how much of the community treasury should be allocated to the Tangle Community Treasury committee. Currently, 63,476,697 SMR ($2,385,417 current price), will be up for a community vote to decide, how much do we allocate to the Treasury committee? We can use all of it, or we can use non-of-it, or we can use a percentage of it. We could use it in the same way we used it over the past year, or, we can try something new and different. There are many things to consider.

  1. Really I think it comes down to if we want to stick to a traditional model which we used over the past year, where grant submitters submit projects to the committee which we review and then fund. Or, we can try something new and innovative in the spirit of the Shimmer network being a place to innovate. So what does that mean? This means we can integrate the community more through integrating with Gitcoin Grants Program (Gitcoin Explorer) and work to integrate a method of Gitcoin Passport to prove human identity and setup Quadratic Funding. The above is something very innovative in the Web3 governance funding space and something we can focus on.

  2. We can stick to the traditional method that we have completed over the past year and will continue for the IOTA Treasury. Instead of trying something new or continuing innovation, we can simply stick with what works and continue this over the 2024/2025 term.

  3. The Treasury can simply not spend anything. Whatever grant the treasury accepts ultimately it needs to fund that grant. This can be done either by the Treasury liquidating, or paying the grant out in Shimmer and the project liquidating the tokens. There are some people that think it would be better to not put any sell pressure on the market price as compared to funding projects that will either grow, or not hurt the ecosystem. What does ‘not hurt’ mean? There have been some projects that have been funded because they needed operating capital to survive until EVM launched. The committee felt if those projects stopped operating the negative effect on the ecosystem would have been detrimental.

If option 1. or 2. above is chosen by the community the next question becomes, how much of the 63,476,697 SMR should be allocated to use? We can take a big chunk of the funding and committ it to make Shimmer a solid network on its own, or, we can use a minimal amount of the Treasury believing the SMR price will increase over time.

I want to initiate these discusssions early and integrate the community to hear everyone’s thoughts and discussion points. Lets make these decisions as one community!


You probably want some activity. Choosing #3 makes sense on price terms but at the same time you want to avoid appearing dead. So you could just do #2 but dial it back. Then dial it way up when Shimmer climbs.

And Gitcoin sounds amazing. I would focus on a scaled back #2 as long as price is low, and keep gaming out gitcoin integration until it makes sense to make some sort of leap.


Number 2. We should definitely support projects, but I’m uncertain about the percentage because I don’t have a full picture of what is needed and how much is required for the projects to move forward.

1 Like

Thanks for the discussion points!

I agree, we have a working model and until something is tested and proven then we should continue what has been doing well. Noting that, I did have a meeting with Gitcoin’s Passport team and seeking a quotation from them to support a grant and create a customized Passport for the Shimmer community. If this is not a majorly large grant this could be a good step to test something out while keeping the remaining funds focused on community projects as we have been.


I would give 50% of the allocated funds to #2 because it is already working, and 50% to #1 because I like the idea of quadratic funding.

For those who don’t know how quadratic funding work, a good explanation in the link below:


I really like Quadratic Funding and what the Gitcoin Passport team is doing to deal with the identity gaming is really interesting. They have the data that supports if someone gets enough passport badges to reach a humanity score of 20, then there is around 20% sybill attack. Whereas, if a person has a score of 25 there is a 5% sybill attack.

Personally, I think QF should be used, tested, built upon for the hopes of finding a secure and safe Quadratic Voting system. Would be great to have this on a fee’less Layer-1 Tangle one day!