Please login or register.

Codify the FFS standard and improve end-user experience

From a new-user perspective, I can see how the Forum Funding System could be considered a bit adhoc and hazy. When first researching on how to write a FFS-specific proposal, it was only by chance that I stumbled upon the FFS sticky and even then, the wording seemed more like a proposal than a codified standard.

I propose that a clear document (or site-specific area of intention), with clear methods or visual cues (and/or a possible diagram), be implemented. The goal of such an implementation would be to produce an end result that would invite more users to learn about (and use) the Forum Funding System.

In terms of producing a graphic/diagram, I would vouch for something similar to Monero's governance process as it is colourful and logically clear.

More importantly, I would also propose a revamp of the current 'multiple-category' system or move to a site-specific area or even move away from the forum altogether but keep the crowdfunding aspect intact; possibly moving to a different system altogether. To do something like that would require more effort but I think would be beneficial to overall economics and trading.

I'm curious to hear input from the more experienced forum users here. I hope that we can produce something more flexible, informative, and inviting.

Replies: 3
Gingeropolous posted 7 years ago Replies: 1 | Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

I agree. I put the FFS sticky together because there was nothing except a mention in a monero missives podcast at some point. And ultimately this has been an organic, lets-figure-out-how-it-should-work-as-we-go thing. But perhaps we're at the point where we figured it out?

If you want a document to exist, the fastest way it will happen is if you draft something (be the change you want to see in the world! :) ). We can shoot it back and forth if you want, or discuss its specifics in this thread. Some of the more clear FFS proposals have been drafted by debruyne, tewingent, and moneromooo ... (hell, everyone except me). So maybe I'm not the best to be discussing this. But getting these folks involved would be good. But its rare that people frequent this forum unless they are specifically pointed to it.

Regarding the infrastructure surrounding the FFS (revamp paragraph), I don't know what a good alternative would be.

Reply to: Gingeropolous
anonimal posted 7 years ago Replies: 1 | Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

Hi Gingeropolous,

I'd be happy to draft something though I am presently swamped with other work + Kovri + and now possibly a GNU Social instance. In the meantime, I'm not opposed to reviewing any work that anyone else submits.

Re: infrastructure, maybe we should look into tweaking/hosting one of the following:

I've only looked briefly at the repos/sites and haven't used any of them so I can't personally vouch for them - but they could be very useful.

Reply to: anonimal Gingeropolous
anonimal edited 7 years ago Weight: 0 | Link [ - ]

I've spent a couple of hours playing around with the software listed above and, IMHO, none of them are useful to us.

There is the slightest chance that a modified, XMR-friendly, tip4commit may be of interest to the community but I'm not putting my eggs in that basket. I've left a note in #monero-dev in case others have an opinion.

@Gingeropolous: I think I'll focus on your original proposal and write-up a draft when I get a chance to do so.