I am guessing you did not read the full proposal because it goes all the way to setting up guild specific markets.
This funding is for the core infrastructure stuff (v2), finished in April-May
The markets etc are a possible v3 extension after and specified as experimental features depending on how the v2 goes.
The funding is for ALL of it. There is no differentiation in payment according to the sigprop as written. As you have pointed out, we are paying for the study and experimental features also.
- model, organisation, integrations (ordengg) — 13000
- smart contract (PG) — 7500
- graph and data structures (ordengg) — 3000
- visual assets (fakeGotchi artists) — 1500
@Quincy1971 take it as package deal; or you would prefer me to write that I was thinking 200 hors about the guilds?
LOL i think you need to direct that one to @Immaterial because i took it as a package deal
so what structure would make you happy?
In regards to pay or were you asking about something else?
anything, what is the problem with a payment?
Great idea ser.
One feature I would love to see integrated with the gotchiverse itself is guild names under our gotchis, as with all other classic mmorpgs.
What your building could potentially hook up with the verse and achieve this?
I am confused because i never said anything about your billing for your proposal. I was just helping to clarify what was actually being funded.
Since we’ll have guild crests, we can just have the crest next to our name. A little square logo will take up much less space and be easier to recognize. This is a web3 upgrade… normally games use words because you can’t mint nfts
Even better. Some form of guild recognition in the verse apart from the wearable would be great!
What about a non brs back slot that if you hsve a “guild cape” wearable, it displays the guild crest automatically. This would pay for itself and not inflate brs, while opening up another market where people could contribute vanity wearables.
Lovely! If the DAO Forge team prop passes, we’ve got some ideas cooking on this, too. Stay tuned
Id like to hook all the projects together so they make engagement loops. Put a forge instance that gives a schematic when you burn an alchemica offering at the altar next to it at some high level of the dungeon. Gotchi can only use it once and its soul bound once forged.
For what it’s worth, I think this chicken or egg debate about game mechanics vs game infrastructure regarding funding the guild project highlights a larger issue, at least for me. There many good ideas from many developer groups requesting funding support. These ideas are typically posted as Snapshot sigprops for standalone opinions/decisions.
I would prefer that there were a periodic report or dashboard where the status of all funded and proposed projects can be viewed, presenting information like inception date, proposed deadline, total funding, percent completion, status summary, etc. This way the various projects competing for resources can be evaluated in context. As a voter I can then evaluate the relative merits of each request within the overall ecosystem effort.
I’m sure that we can walk and chew gum at the same time. The levels of funding support, timeframes and priorities for projects are the issue. Guild infrastructure and game mechanics features development could occur in parallel at different rates.
It’s on teams to demonstrate a result of work and measurable deliverables. I’m not sure exactly what will be the final structure, but can look something like:
- how many new guilds were created
- in what parts of game guilds framework helped, how?
- feedback from users (guild leaders and users)
What metric you think I should add?
What you are describing for is great for drilling down into a specific project, to better understand its timeline, progress and deliverables. I was referring to a higher level summary dashboard of all of the DAO’s funded projects, to aid in DAO project funding decision-making, perhaps organized by roadmap objectives. When a proposed project is evaluated in the context of the overall goals and commitments of all projects I think it’s easier to determine the relative value of each investment and how it moves the Gotchiverse forward. It makes it easier to think in terms of both/and rather than just either/or.
22/07/23 GUILS DEVELOPMENT UPDATE
It’s been a few months since fireball ally, in collaboration with Aavegotchi community members, began working on an on-chain guilds expansion. Right now, I want to update the community on what’s developed for V2 and outline the next steps before V3 and beyond.
The core of the framework consists of a few layers: the permission system and guild gameplay.
The permission system is based on Zodiac and currently has the following features:
(1) An address can deploy the on-chain guild and become a guild master
(2) An address (other than the guild master) can apply for guild membership
(3) The guild master can accept or decline membership applications
(4) Once accepted, members can choose to leave the guild
(5) An address can be a member of only one guild (ensured by a membership token)
This core framework is a great tool for facilitating social contracts, team formation, and brand building. It allows for signalling on a product, strategy, or other ecosystem effort.
This layer based on non-transferable ERC-1155 tokens, works as follows:
(1) Once the guild is initially deployed, a guild flag in the form of a non-transferable ERC-1155 token is minted. This is the starting point for guild gameplay, and the guild is considered active as long as it holds its guild flag.
(2) Each accepted member’s address receives a proof of guild membership token (non-transferable ERC-1155).
Guild gameplay layer represents the equivalent of non-transferable wearables but for guilds. Other use cases will be discovered as we progress and collaborate with DAO sub-projects that are planning to use guild to their advantage
I propose that we start from a zero principle and consider all Aavegotchi on-chain assets as metrics upon which we can base guild profiles. There are five major asset categories in the Aavegotchi/Gotchiverse games:
(2) Characters (+ portals)
(4) Alchemica lords (land, alchemica yield)
(5) GLTR lords (including GLTR yields/farms)
After running the experiment, we will receive data on the types of alliances we have and can estimate the magnitude of holdings and voting power for the major DAO team.
We are still finalising the UI and Gnosis Safe protocol integration for our client, and most likely we will do a test deployment for a guild framework V2 within a week.
Looking great! definitely lots of potential here.
Question: How might things unfold if a guild leader wallet is compromised? Or a wallet holding guild flag?