PEP-57: GRIP Renewal



This proposal is for renewal of GRIP for a further DAO-funded trial period of six months - or 100 hours of work - whichever comes first. Value creation and value measurement will be its defining features. At the end of the trial, a proposal may be submitted for continuation of GRIP.

At the three-month mark - or 50 hours of work - whichever comes first, a review will be conducted including with regard to funding, scope, admin compensation, membership management, how feedback is working, and possible important tweaks.


What is GRIP?

GRIP is a grassroots community group designed to help people submit better proposals - and thereby improve governance - by providing quality feedback, writing assistance and visual aids. It is made up of members with Pocket Network technical and economic expertise, an editor and a graphic artist.

The technical specialists provide feedback on proposals related to Pocket Network technology such as protocol upgrades, parameter adjustments, security enhancements, and community developed tooling. They look for flaws and opine on budget. They assess the impact of proposals on security, efficiency, and scalability.

The economics specialists give feedback on proposals requiring economic analysis including inflation controls, unstaking time, stake minimums, and validation of pool targets. They look for unexpected economic impacts.

Once a formal proposal has been drafted, the editor can proofread or copy edit, including adjustments for clarity, adding detail where needed, and making complex proposals digestible for a general audience. The graphic artist can add infographics for effect and clarity.

Summaries: Before voting on complex proposals, GRIP can create an infographic and/or summary that displays the competing viewpoints.

What GRIP is not

GRIP is not for lobbying, gatekeeping or giving personal views on the merits of a proposal.


PEP-45 did not set out how GRIP would operate. Based on the limited data from our initial three-month trial and the community feedback to date, we are proposing the system that’s set out below.

Opt-in only

GRIP help of any sort is now opt-in only. Also, impact assessment figures large in the proposed system given the importance of demonstrating value to the DAO.

‘GRIP Help’ category

As part of the proposed system, a “GRIP Help” category will be created in the Forum Governance section, just below the Pre-Proposal category. This will facilitate contact between contributors and GRIP regarding the drafting of formal proposals and avoid cluttering the Pre-Proposal category. Also, where GRIP collaborates with authors on a draft (Google Doc), community members who want to view the draft will know that this is where to find the link to it.

Applying for GRIP help

Authors who want help from GRIP can let us know in the GRIP Help category of the Forum. Or they can reach out in the #public-lobby of the Get a GRIP Discord server or they can DM us.

Feedback mechanisms

GRIP will explore setting up a device for registering feedback from those who receive GRIP help and others, including an option that allows this feedback to be provided anonymously. In addition, GRIP may contact authors to get feedback.

In the venues noted below, GRIP will provide the following types of assistance:

Pre-Proposal category (Forum)

  • expert feedback

GRIP Help category (Forum): Draft of formal proposal

  • expert commentary

  • Infographics or other visual aids

  • proofreading or copy editing

GRIP Discord server

  • live consultation with experts (open to public)

  • private feedback from expert


Pre-Proposal category feedback

  1. When posting to the Pre-Proposal category of the Forum, contributors will be asked if they want help from GRIP, and if so, what type of assistance.

  2. If expert feedback in the Pre-Proposal category is requested, the relevant GRIP team (technical or economic) will determine who will provide it.

  3. The proposal author will be requested to rate each item of feedback: 1. unhelpful, 2. helpful or 3. very helpful. The author can add comments as well. Also, other community members are encouraged to rate the feedback and add comments.

‘GRIP Help’ category: Drafting the formal proposal

  1. In addition to, or instead of GRIP feedback in the Pre-Proposal category, the author may wish to have a GRIP expert help with the drafting of a formal proposal using a Google Doc. The author must start a thread in the GRIP Help category and post a link there to the Google Doc, with viewing enabled for the community.

  2. The author also may request GRIP’s graphic artist to prepare a visual aid.

  3. Once the draft of the formal proposal is complete, the author can ask the GRIP editor to proofread or copy edit (including a final expert review).

  4. Upon completion of the draft, the author will be asked to rate and comment on any assistance.

Get a GRIP Discord server: Live consultation

  1. Any contributor whose pre-proposal is posted in the Pre-Proposal category or publicly viewable as a Google Doc, can request a live consultation with a GRIP expert in the Meeting Room of the Get a GRIP Discord server. The contributor chooses whether to allow the public to watch only or actively participate.

Get a GRIP Discord server: Private-help option

  1. GRIP will set up a unique pre-proposal channel for any contributor who wants some private assistance before going public. The channel title will be publicly visible but not the contents or contributor identity. Once the pre-proposal is moved to the Forum, the contents and identity will be made public. The guidelines for private-help can be reviewed here.

The private-help option is new and untested. We will observe its use, and based on community input, determine whether to change and/or keep it. The private-help option could move to the Forum once private group DMs become available; this would allow access to all of GRIP’s services in one place.

Our graphic artist has created an infographic to illustrate the GRIP proposal assistance process:

WORK SHARE: The experts will decide amongst themselves who will provide the requested input. A given pre-proposal could be more in line with one person’s expertise than another’s, or two experts might each have something useful to say. Or a rotational scheme could be set up. If an author requests feedback from a specific GRIP member, we will try to accommodate but may be unable to do so, e.g., if the person is unavailable or in order to fairly share the workload.

To guide proposal authors, a public record will be created, in due course, for each GRIP technical and economic specialist identifying their purported skills/expertise and where they believe they can be most helpful, along with the feedback they’ve received from proposal authors.

GRIP help is available now

Need help with a proposal? You don’t need to wait for the vote on this proposal to seek any of the assistance that’s listed above. GRIP is already fully operational. DM us or reach out in the #public-lobby of our Get a GRIP Discord server. (Funding for this help is included in this proposal.)

NOTE: Contributors can post their ideas or drafts in the Forum Pre-Proposal category and not seek any input from GRIP. Or they can post a proposal as a PEP, PIP or PUP, and skip the pre-proposal stage entirely. However, for all but the simplest proposals this is not recommended since pre-proposal scrutiny produces better proposals. In addition, it’s recommended that all proposals be at least proofread (by GRIP) before publication.

GRIP Credo: Transparency and Accountability

We consider it important to state the principles that govern our work and the manner in which we will carry out our DAO mandate if this proposal passes.


For accountability, GRIP’s engagement with contributors and other paid work is fully transparent.


GRIP believes that transparency enhances proposal development. For edification and to nurture a culture of openness, ideas and pre-proposals should be debated in public.

New members

Anyone can join GRIP by applying in the #join-grip channel on the Get a Grip Discord server. Membership begins once you’ve demonstrated sufficient skill/knowledge/expertise by provision of GRIP assistance and two GRIP members have vouched for you, including a specialist in the area where you wish to provide feedback, or the editor, if you wish to proofread/copy edit. (For a GRIP member who wants to be accepted into a different GRIP category, vouching is needed only from a member of that category.)


  1. Immediately upon approval of this PEP, and as collaboratively as possible, GRIP will complete any needed revisions to the PIP and PUP templates.

  2. Expert feedback, both public and private, summaries, editing, infographics and all other assistance will be provided based on the unpredictable influx of requests by contributors.

  3. For large proposals of a technical or economic nature and retroactive funding requests for technical work, GRIP experts will submit a scorecard .

  4. GRIP will add to the Pocket docs information on its services and a link to the new Proposal Preparation Guide.

  5. A #pre-proposal-support channel was recently created in Pocket’s public Discord server. GRIP will monitor this channel and reply to posts.


DAO funding

Monthly, up to $5K will be allocated to GRIP, which will distribute the funds as it sees fit. The monthly allocation from the DAO may vary based on the amount of work done and its impact. Where a monthly allocation is less than $5K, any “unspent” portion can be used for a later month where the level of compensation to be paid exceeds $5K. DAO allocations to GRIP will be based on the 30-day trailing average of the $POKT/USD price as of the date of remittance.

GRIP will pay its members a premium for assistance that’s highly rated, and nothing for work that’s rated as unhelpful. Unhelpfulness needs to be confirmed by GRIP. GRIP members will keep a record of what they do, and when and how much time it took.

GRIP will report monthly to the DAO on its contributions and the corresponding feedback.

For clarity, the budget will cover work related to carrying out this proposal’s deliverables, actionable items and setup related to collecting feedback, possible mechanisms for seeing whether authors want GRIP help, and publicizing GRIP’s services. Further, GRIP will compensate its members for work related to admin, including reporting to the DAO or PNF on work done and impact. Meeting time will not be compensated. GRIP will try to limit admin fees to 10% of its monthly budget.

In addition, GRIP seeks ongoing reimbursement for its subscription to Adobe Illustrator. GRIP signed up for the basic package in January 2023 to be able to directly edit infographic copy. This saves time as it eliminates the need for multiple DMs with the graphic artist. Monthly cost is about $30. The DAO can share this subscription.

Pre- and Post-trial funding

This proposal also covers a small amount of work done between February 22 and the vote on renewal. (Compensation for these hours will be added to the bill for the first month of GRIP’s operations if this proposal is approved.)

Should GRIP seek to renew at the end of the trial envisaged by this proposal, it can choose to keep operating pending the vote on renewal, in which case the DAO will continue to fund it as per this proposal.

Clarifications re GRIP operations

Several GRIP members are employed by entities in the Pocket ecosystem. Any GRIP-related work for which they seek payment is done in their spare time and outside the scope of the responsibilities and duties of their employment.

GRIP team members will be compensated only for work related to their defined GRIP roles. Accordingly, unless otherwise specified, the editor will be compensated only for copy editing, proofreading and writing (including infographic text); the graphic artist will be compensated only for infographic work, and the economic and technical specialists will be compensated only for assistance within their respective areas.

If a GRIP member creates a pre-proposal, and later, authorship transfers to someone else, he will not be able to bill for work on it. Further, GRIP members will not be compensated for private help on pre-proposals by other GRIP members.

Actionable Items

For clarity, a vote for renewal of GRIP is a vote that the DAO and/or PNF do the following:

  1. In the Forum Governance section, just below the Pre-Proposal category, create a “GRIP Help” category within 24 hours of the end of voting. Enable full permissions for GRIP within this category.

  2. Allow GRIP to install, as soon as possible, and if technically feasible, a mechanism for rating and commenting on GRIP feedback in the Pre-Proposal category, including an option that enables anonymity. Provide any needed help in this regard.

  3. Within 72 hours of the conclusion of voting, allow GRIP to revise the message at the top of the +New Topic box in the Pre-Proposal category of the Forum to include reference to the new GRIP Help category, and possibly other changes.

  4. Allow GRIP to install, at its discretion, and if technically feasible, a mechanism, such as a pop-up with check boxes, whereby proposal authors who post to the Pre-Proposal category of the Forum, can specify what type of help they want, if any. Provide any needed assistance in this regard to ensure that such mechanism is up and running within two weeks of GRIP’s request.

  5. Adjust editor permissions in the Proposal categories to allow posting of summaries and infographics.

Dissenting Opinions

  1. The trial period is too long. To keep paying monthly for GRIP when we don’t know whether it will get traction, is not a good use of DAO funds.
  • For the first time since its inception, GRIP help is opt-in. Its private-help option is brand new. Given that the creation of new pre-proposals is unpredictable, and requests by their authors for GRIP help will be even more so, a longer trial period is needed to facilitate adoption and provide sufficient data to evaluate utility.

  • GRIP will seek monthly funding based on the amount of work it does and reported impact. If it does little work, or if feedback is unhelpful, monthly funding requests will be reduced. In other words, the DAO will be spending money only for work that’s done and deemed helpful.

  1. The payment scheme is opaque and impedes oversight. Anyone using GRIP help should be told how much GRIP is allocating as compensation for that assistance.
  • GRIP will report monthly on its work along with impact assessment. Notes @b3n: It’s not the hours people care about, it’s the value add. “Teams’ internal allocations,” he says, “are their domain and everyone else can stay the hell out of it.“

  • “For a max investment of $5,000 per month we want to incentivize 10 long-time community members to spend more time than they already do helping others with proposals,” says Steve of Dabble Lab. “We trust these 10 people because they have proven track records in our community. So we won’t ask them to justify their time.” After a given time frame, “we’ll reflect and consider if it’s worth continuing with them. This eliminates the concerns with the use of the hours.”


See “Recipients” at the top of this proposal and, for the backgrounds of each, see PEP-45.


Some changes have been made to this proposal since it was first posted. Notably, these include the following:

  • The trial period is reformulated as six months - or 100 hours of work - whichever comes first. At the three-month mark - or 50 hours of work - whichever comes first, a review will be conducted.

  • The GRIP 'n GROW section has been removed.


GRIP was created with unanimous community support because everyone recognized the value of helping people with proposals and making them better. GRIP was seen as a good way to incentivize skilled and knowledgeable community members to take the time to provide quality feedback on technical and economic proposals. However, not unexpectedly for an initiative without precedent, our first few months were trial and error. We have learned from it and listened to your feedback. We are hopeful that the carefully laid-out scheme of the current renewal proposal will enable GRIP to deliver on its promise.


Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.


Thanks @zaatar

This revised proposal is looking much better, and thanks for taking the time to synthesise everyone’s input. I have a few more constructive comments for your - and the team’s - consideration.

Dealing with each in turn:

Sockets run month to month until ended by PNF or the contributor. So 6 months is a long time, particularly in Web3. As a result, I would suggest 3 months as a reasonable time to judge this next iteration of GRIP. If GRIP is becoming more valuable and important to the community by this point, it will be crucial to consider how its membership is managed, how feedback is working, and any other important tweaks. This will also be an opportunity to expand funding and/or scope, depending on how things play out.

You may already plan to do this, but as I didn’t see it mentioned specifically, I recommend that the GRIP team state how much they plan to charge for each piece of work at the end of each engagement, ie the number of hours spent on it. This is helpful for an accountability perspective and also gives the opportunity for the proposal author to respond in real-time to say whether the support given was great value for money or not.

Can you clarify how this will vary? And is the sum of $5k a cap or how much you want to spend each money, notwithstanding the work done?

To be clear, I’m completely ok with the latter - which was what my initial suggestion was using Coordinape as a tool to enable such - but I just want to understand your thinking.

There will always be a need for admin, but it should be capped at a figure of max 5-10% of the monthly DAO allocation.

I think this is fair. Out of interest, can others in the DAO use this subscription for DAO related work?

Is this necessary? Is the idea not that proposal authors specifically ask for help if needed? And they can just message on the specific GRIP section of the forum, or to message one of its members? I’m generally keen to avoid over complicating things where possible


Adobe Illustrator subscription

Absolutely. I’ve DM’d you the log-in credentials in case anyone needs it. (I asked Jack earlier; he said PNF doesn’t need it. )

Will reply to the other questions shortly.


Thanks Dermot for your input. Shaping GRIP based on your feedback, and that of other DAO members, shows that this really is a community initiative.

GRIP’s two main offerings are expert feedback on technical and economic proposals and writing assistance (proofreading and copyediting). Infographics come next. If over three months there are no, or very few, technical and economic proposals, or if there are a few or more such proposals but no author asks for GRIP help, then there will be no data on the value of such assistance. Instead of six months, we could limit the trial to six months; 8 pre-proposals including 5 technical or economic ones; or 50 hours of feedback and 10 hours of proofreading/copy editing, whichever comes first.

This formula would not prevent the conducting of a review at the three-month mark on membership management, how feedback is working, and possible “important tweaks.”

GRIP will disclose to “customers” how much time the work took - but only after they rate the work: unhelpful, helpful or very helpful, plus optional additional commentary. This will produce needed feedback. Further, it will avoid situations where a customer rates the work based on how long it took.

My idea is to pay a base rate of $100 per hour. Depending on how the help is rated by the recipient and others, this could fluctuate: more for highly rated assistance, nothing for work that’s rated as unhelpful. In the latter case, one or more GRIP experts would review the feedback. If the unhelpfulness is confirmed, the consequences would be a) no pay, b) a warning. If there are recurrences, GRIP might remove or suspend the member, depending on the circumstances.

Monthly, GRIP will tally its hours, and based on the feedback, determine what to pay its members and therefore how much to request from the DAO, up to a $5K cap. Monthly allocations could be lower. Any “unspent” portion of the $5K budget, can be used for a later month where the level of compensation to be paid exceeds the cap.

That said, I am open to trying Coordinape (for at least part of the trial) and would be happy to work with @b3n to set it up.

That seems to be a reasonable target range. In the early going, however, when additional setup work and awareness promotion may be needed, that percentage could be exceeded. Let’s revisit this at the three-month mark.

I am inclined to agree. However, before an author can ask for help, he needs to know it’s available.

Currently, there’s a message at the top of the + New Topic box in the Pre-Proposal category that plugs GRIP’s services. Let’s see how this works.

@b3n observes that people are unlikely to initiate a request for help from GRIP, and suggests that GRIP contact authors to see if they want help.

We can revisit this if the renewal proposal passes. Accordingly, this part of the proposal will be amended to read:

  • "Within 72 hours of the conclusion of voting, revise the message at the top of the +New Topic box in the Pre-Proposal category of the Forum to include (a) reference to the GRIP Help category referred to in the renewal proposal and (b) possible other GRIP-requested changes.

  • “Following review once/if this proposal passes, allow GRIP to install, at its discretion, a mechanism, such as a pop-up with check boxes, whereby proposal authors who post to the Pre-Proposal category of the Forum, can specify what type of help they want, if any. Provide any needed assistance in this regard to ensure that such mechanism is up and running within two weeks of GRIP’s request.”


This proposal is now up for voting on Snapshot.


GRIP Report no. 1: first 30 days post renewal

The GRIP renewal proposal was approved 21 votes to 2 on April 7. This note covers the period from April 7-May 7.

Opt-in Assistance & Value Measurement

GRIP assistance is provided now only to those who request it, as stipulated in the renewal proposal. Under this opt-in model, three “customers” came calling.

All (two) pre-proposal authors during the period under review sought GRIP help and both rated the assistance they got as “very helpful.”

The author of a draft proposal who bypassed the pre-proposal stage and went straight to proposal, also sought GRIP feedback.

Here are the details:

  • @katerina, ops manager at Encode Club, asked GRIP to review her pre-proposal for a partnership that would see Pocket run bootcamp workshops on its tech. She dropped a link to a Google Doc with her pre-proposal in the #public-lobby of the Get a GRIP (GaG) Discord server and asked for GRIP to review it. I gave feedback via her Google Doc. She rated the assistance very helpful.

  • @crabman reached out to GRIP for input on the Relay Driven Inflation (RDI) pre-proposal, and said that @RawthiL’s feedback was very helpful.

  • @msa6867 specifically asked @shane and me for input on a reimbursement proposal. He made his request in the #public-lobby on the GaG Discord server. That much of the feedback (given in the #public-lobby) was incorporated into the proposal speaks to its utility. (Inferred) rating: helpful. (The DAO is not being billed for any work related to feedback by GRIP members on the proposal once it went live in the Forum).

Other Deliverables

A “GRIP Help” category was set up in the Forum Governance section. If you’re working on a proposal and want expert input, a visual aid or copy editing, this is the place to ask for it. Also, this is where authors should post the Google Doc links to pre-proposals and draft proposals for input by GRIP.

GRIP did not complete revisions to the PIP and PUP templates as none of our tech experts was available for this work during the period under review. GRIP expects to complete this work during month two.

One of the promised deliverables was to add info on GRIP to the Pocket docs section that covers proposals. This work, including necessary amendments to the existing section, will be done during month two.


New members: Although PEP-57 set out the steps whereby anyone can apply to join GRIP, no one did so during this period.

Confidential assistance: No one applied for private help from GRIP.

Live consultations: None requested.

Infographic work: None requested.

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill totals $1893, or about 38% of its available $5000 monthly budget. GRIP work is compensated at a base rate of $100 per hour; $150 per hour is paid for assistance that authors deem “very helpful.”

Here is the breakdown with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Rating Community Response Billed to DAO
GRIP Help Feedback on Encode Bootcamp pre-proposal very helpful
Feedback on msa reimbursement draft proposal helpful
Feedback on RDI pre-proposal very helpful 7 likes
Revise PEP template no feedback to date
GRIP setup GRIP Proposal Assistance infographic revisions n/a n/a
draft intro for GRIP Help category in Forum n/a n/a
create Google Sheet for tracking expenses, work and community feedback n/a n/a
devise template for monthly reporting on GRIP services and value assessment n/a n/a
GRIP admin Prepare and give March 8 presentation on initial 3-month trial (on “Office Hours”) n/a n/a
Draft report on first month of activity ending May 7 n/a n/a
GRIP expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription Jan-May 2023 $118

A small amount of the above work was done between February 22 and renewal approval on April 7; payment for that period is covered under the renewal proposal. As GRIP’s “infrastructure” gets progressively set up, set-up work can be expected to taper off moving forward.

Please let us know what you think. All comments are welcome.


Hi @zaatar

can you please expand more on the fees charged to the DAO related to GRIP setup and GRIP admin? How much are you charging for sharing this report with the community? And similarly for the office hours trial? These costs go directly to justifying the programme and it doesn’t feel right that such fees are uncapped, as without being accountable this programme would simply end.

Furthermore, from a personal perspective spending 50% of the monthly spend on internal admin seems very excessive. And I don’t think it’s right that the amount paid on admin should ever be more than c.10% of the funds spent on impactful work. Which would be $82.5 based on this month’s work.

As a reminder from the previous discussions:


@Dermot, thank you for your feedback, as always.

Bill Itemization

Here is the breakdown:

Who What Hours billed
Ale Infographic updates 2.5
Ale Expense sheet design and modifications 1.5
Zaatar Draft intro for new GRIP Help category in Forum 0.5
Zaatar Prepare and deliver review of GRIP output from November 22 to March 7 (on “Office Hours”) 2.5
Prepare report for DAO on GRIP re period ending May 7 2.5

Admin Costs

  1. Your comment reflects a misunderstanding of the “monthly” work breakdown. Half of the admin work relates to the period from February 22 to April 7, thereby reducing the admin total for Apr7-May 7 to 2.5 hours.

  2. This was GRIP’s first report since its adoption of an opt-in model and transition to global billing (no hourly breakdown of work by each GRIP member). There was no template for this report, which necessitated developing one including a work output/value assessment table. This template will serve us going forward; the work involved in creating it can be fairly characterized as “setup.” Accordingly, admin work for this report is hereby reduced from 2.5 hours to 1.5 hours and 1.0 hour is added to setup. (The table in the report above has been changed accordingly.) This drops the admin work for month one to $150, or 18% of the $825 bill for GRIP services.

  3. During this first month, there was little occasion for use of GRIP’s services: we used only 38% of our $5000 budget. Since admin costs will likely remain constant, an increase in “impactful” work will see a drop in the comparative cost of admin.

(Also, you refer to an Office Hours “trial.” No such thing. It was a review of GRIP’s first three months, its initial trial period, that was presented during Office Hours on March 8.)

While PEP-57 did not contain a hard cap for admin (just an aspirational 10%), I have billed for only a fraction of the actual time spent on preparing the reports, limiting fees to what seemed reasonable.

I trust that my response not only addresses your concerns but also demonstrates the transparency and accountability that define GRIP’s work on behalf of the DAO.


Have you reduced how much you’re charging to the DAO or have you just recategorised the expense? If it’s the latter, I don’t see the benefit in doing so, as it just makes it more confusing.

Never mind the $250 charged to the DAO to present on GRIP work to date, I still think charging $200 to the DAO to share a monthly report on $825 of work is excessive.

I appreciate the transparency, but the main reason for my pushback is that you are a talented contributor whom the ecosystem would benefit much more from if you reallocated your time, so that, for example, you spent 4.5 hours directly driving one of our key ecosystem metrics and only 30 mins reporting back to the DAO, as opposed to 5 hours of reporting (and potentially even more on admin that doesn’t result in any direct impact for the ecosystem).

The more time spent on impact v admin the better for all.


I have recategorized the expense, thereby reducing admin to $150 (not $200).

Totally agree that impactful contribution would better serve Pocket Network. I take no pleasure in admin - but someone has to do it.

1 Like

GRIP Report no. 2: May 7 - June 30

This is the second report on GRIP since its renewal was approved by PEP-57 on April 7. This report covers more than one month as PNF asked GRIP to report on its work to the DAO at the end of the calendar month for payment purposes. Publication of this report was delayed to await feedback on GRIP contributions during the period under review.

Assistance Requests

Over this period, there were five requests for GRIP help.

  • Ivan Jelic approached GRIP, noting that CompareNodes, of which he’s a co-founder, had an idea on how to benefit the Pocket Network ecosystem. Provided the options for modes of GRIP help, he requested we create a private channel on the GRIP Discord server. This was done May 16. Named #compare-nodes, he has not yet used it.

  • Addi asked for confidential help with Thunderhead’s Pokt Info reimbursement pre-proposal which was later floated as “PEP-61: Pokt Info Partial Reimbursement Request.” A private channel, #pokt-info, was set up on the GRIP Discord Server. Feedback (QSpider, zaatar) was given in this channel and via a live consultation in the Meeting Room on the GRIP Discord server. The contents of the #pokt-info channel have been made public.

  • Jack asked for GRIP feedback on ARR. Shane and MSA provided feedback. (MSA’s input was provided as part of the GRIP membership application process and therefore was not compensated.)

  • Ramiro sought GRIP feedback on MINT. MSA, a GRIP member by this point, provided it.

  • Shane asked for GRIP feedback on BASH. Ramiro provided it.

Feedback evaluation is set out in the chart below under “GRIP bill to DAO.”

Changes to GRIP Process

Experience during the period under review has shown that the process for provision of GRIP feedback to authors and the way this feedback is evaluated need fine tuning. What follows are proposed changes designed to protect DAO funds and improve the assessment of GRIP feedback.

Going forward, the author of a proposal will be requested to evaluate feedback on a scale of 0-10, zero being unhelpful and 10 being extremely helpful. The higher the rating, the greater the remuneration. Work that earns a 5 rating will be compensated at $100 per hour. A zero rating will not be compensated. Authors who assign a zero will be asked to explain this rating.

Further, an author might find that some feedback was unhelpful but not all. Here, authors will be asked to quantify the percentage of feedback provided that was unhelpful (zero rating). They will be asked to rate the remaining feedback overall from 1-10.

Where an author opines that the entirety of a GRIP expert’s assistance was unhelpful, further input will be sought from another member of the same GRIP team. The GRIP teammate can confirm the 0 rating or suggest a different rating. This recognizes that while an author may view the help as useless, the feedback in question may nonetheless be seen as helpful to the community. The GRIP member’s assessment will govern.

In addition, once a request for GRIP expert assistance is made, and a GRIP expert is chosen to provide it, that expert is authorized to perform TWO (2) hours of work. If the expert wants more time, an hour-specific request - up to a maximum of eight - will need to be made. The request must be approved by the author of the proposal and one member of the corresponding GRIP expert team. If the author fails to respond within 48 hours (excluding weekends), approval by the GRIP team member will suffice. Approval could be for all the hours requested or fewer hours. Additional hours devoted to feedback without prior approval will not be compensated, save in exceptional circumstances.

This tweak is meant to make GRIP members’ work more efficient and focused.

New members

MSA joined GRIP as a member of the economic experts team.

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill totals $1943.50. GRIP work is compensated at a base rate of $100 per hour; $150 per hour is paid for assistance that authors deem “very helpful.”

Here is the breakdown with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Community Response Amount Billed
GRIP Help Assist CompareNodes n/a n/a
Feedback on Pokt Info reimbursement preproposal very helpful n/a
Feedback on PUP-32: ARR pending 2 likes
Feedback on BASH preproposal very helpful
Feedback on MINT preproposal helpful (60% of feedback), unhelpful (40%) 6 likes
MINT copyediting helpful
GRIP Admin Prepare report on activity from May 7 - June 30
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription June 2023 $29.50

For the period under review, admin has been limited to 10 percent of the fees billed for GRIP help. Appropriate remuneration for admin will be reconsidered in a future report.


GRIP evolves with additional members and more transparency and caps on payments to become more cost efficient. :+1:

1 Like

GRIP Report no. 3: July 1-31

As befits the dog days of summer, GRIP was mostly idle in July.

Assistance Requests

In July, there was only one new pre-proposal, PNF (Payments Negating Favouritism). The author, Cryptocorn, requested GRIP help. (Cryptocorn is a GRIP member.)

Payment for Work on Pre-Proposals Posted Before July

MSA provided feedback (in July) on BASH.

Shane is due a bonus payment ($50) for his June input on ARR. Initially compensated at the standard pay-rate pending author evaluation, Jack (on behalf of PNF) belatedly gave a rating of “very helpful,” triggering the bonus.

Changes to GRIP Process

A slight change is being introduced to reduce friction: as set out below, a GRIP expert who wants extra feedback-hours approved, need get it only from the author or a GRIP member, not both, as set out below:

Once a request for GRIP expert assistance is made, and a GRIP expert is chosen to provide it, that expert is authorized to perform TWO (2) hours of work. If the expert wants more time, an hour-specific request - up to a maximum of eight - will need to be made. The request must be approved by the author of the proposal. If the author fails to respond within 48 hours (excluding weekends), approval can come from a member of the same GRIP team as the expert making the request. Approval could be for all the hours sought or fewer hours. Additional hours devoted to feedback without prior approval will not be compensated, save in exceptional circumstances.

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill totals $359.50. GRIP work is compensated at a rate of between 0-$150 per hour based on author value assessment on a scale of 1-10 (0 being unhelpful, 10 being very helpful). The median pay rate (work judged “helpful”) is $100 per hour.

Here is the breakdown for July’s bill with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Community Response Amount Billed
GRIP Help Feedback on BASH Helpful (50% of feedback) 4 likes
Unhelpful (50%)
Bonus payment for feedback on ARR Very helpful
Copy editing (PNF) Median pay rate
GRIP Admin Prepare report on July activity
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription July 2023 $29.50

For the period under review, admin has been limited to 10 percent of the fees billed for GRIP help. Appropriate remuneration for admin will be discussed in a future report.


GRIP Report no. 4: August 1-31

Assistance Requests

In August, there was only one new pre-proposal, Gandalf. The author, Shane, did not request GRIP help. Gandalf’s future is TBD. (Shane is a GRIP member.)

Ramiro, wishing to refurbish MINT based on prior feedback and get it launch-ready as a proposal, requested additional input and editing. Ramiro says he will put MINT up for a DAO vote when relays hit a regular daily level of at least 2 billion (or, if and when a significant deviation occurs between the ARR emission rate and that projected by MINT). (Ramiro, AKA @RawthiL, is a GRIP member.)

Work on Pre-Proposals Posted Before August

Ale dVG created an infographic for PNF (Payments Negating Favouritism). PNF now seems unlikely to go to proposal and voting. PNF was posted by Cryptocorn, a GRIP member.

Changes to GRIP Process

Just as hours for feedback by experts are capped, limits should also apply to editing and art work/infographics for any pre-proposal or other document.

Up to two hours of editing and artwork are automatically authorised upon an author’s request. The editor and graphic artist can ask for additional hours up to a total of 10. Additional hours requested by the editor must be approved by the author. Given the connection between infographics and proposal clarity, additional hours requested by the artist must be approved by the editor, or if the editor is unavailable within 48 hours, by the author.

In exceptional circumstances, extra hours (over 10) may be approved for editing, artwork or expert feedback, but this will require not only assent of the author (or editor in the case of artwork) but also that of two GRIP team members from the corresponding expert team (where applicable).

Clarity on GRIP compensation

GRIP work is compensated at a rate of between 0-$150 per hour based on author value assessment on a scale of 0-10: $0 for work scored 0, that is, deemed “unhelpful”; $20 per hour for a rating of 1-2, “somewhat helpful”; $100 per hour for a rating of 3-7, “helpful”; and $150 per hour for an 8-10 score, “very helpful”. An author might rate half of an expert’s feedback with a 6, the other half with a 2. Payment will be based on the average rating of 4. (For further payment considerations, please see GRIP Report no. 2, above.)

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill for August totals $2807.

Here is the breakdown with value assessment.

What Details Author Feedback Community Response Amount Billed
GRIP Help Feedback on MINT Helpful
Copy editing (MINT) Very helpful
Artwork (Payments Negating Favouritism) Very helpful
GRIP Admin Prepare report on August activity
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription August 2023 $29.50

For the period under review, admin has been limited to 10 percent of the fees billed for GRIP help. Appropriate remuneration for admin may be reconsidered in a future report.


Hi @zaatar could you please provide more of a breakdown on the expenses for this month. Speaking just for myself it is quite hard to assess the value and ROI here with the items bundled together, at least compared to a more open mechanism like a Socket. If we are paying $2500+ for proposals that are not moving forward we at least need some more granularity around what is being billed against each.

Also, while I’m not questioning the GRIP teams integrity, I do find the current situation of GRIP team members proposals being reviewed and billed by other GRIP team members as basically untenable. The number of proposals in the DAO has reduced dramatically and if that means the only user of GRIPs services are members of GRIP themself, the community should be revisiting whether this is solving a real need and is a good use of funds

1 Like

I agree that having GRIP members using GRIP services is not the best picture, but as you said, the number of proposals have go down and some of the most active members of the community happen to be also part of the DAO. I imagine that this situation will remedy itself if the community starts to grow again, right now is not the best season for independent builders.

Regarding the current billing, I must say that the work done on MINT is quite extensive and given the feedback on the previous version (unedited) it was necessary.
The history of all the copy-editing and feedback can be seen in this doc. Also the updated thread is public. MINT has not gone to voting because the number of relays does not justify the change, it can be put up to vote any moment.


Thanks for sharing. I generally agree and rather than pre-empt what comes next we can wait to discuss it when PEP-57 ends on the 31st of September.

I appreciate that I am in a position of bias, but I think that:

  1. If a pre-proposal doesn’t lead to a proposal and vote, it’s still valuable and should be allocated a certain amount of resources. Our proposal system has largely evolved into open discussion in the pre-proposal phase which helps shape proposals/educate the engaged community and/or show that a proposal wouldn’t be tenable at vote.

  2. While I agree with Ramiro and Ben that it isn’t the best look that it’s largely GRIP members writing proposals and then inviting the help of other GRIP members to critique, our system is set up that many of the most active and knowledgeable members are part of GRIP - as the Pocket experts, and so makes sense that they are the ones most likely to also write proposals. I’m guessing 80 - 90% of proposals outside of PNF are from GRIP members.
    So although there can be accusations of ‘dog-fooding’ the GRIP hours are now capped per proposal to stop excessive work being billed, and the alternative is to expect members to essentially do the critiquing or additional work for free, which I think would be a worse situation than compensating GRIP members for their expertise, which should allow for better proposals to be designed.

Who What Hours Author Evaluation Pay in $US
Ale infographic for Payments Negating Favouritism (PNF) 4.5 very helpful 675
zaatar MINT review, edit 17.6 (only 10 compensable) very helpful 1500
Cryptocorn MINT review, feedback 3.5 helpful 350
TOTAL 2525

Your comment reflects a misreading. As the August report makes clear and as Ramiro reiterates above, MINT is going forward as soon as conditions are ripe. Most of GRIP’s August help bill is for work on MINT.

Regarding “proposals that are not going forward,” my view is that GRIP should not do, and certainly not seek payment for, any work from the point where it becomes clear, if not doubtful, that a proposal is not going to proceed. Managing this issue requires oversight and close coordination between GRIP and proposal authors.

I agree with Cryptocorn that GRIP work on proposals that end up not being put to a DAO vote is nonetheless useful. For one, it demonstrates one of the benefits of GRIP, namely, it tests an idea in the community and can help demonstrate whether it’s worth pursuing. Second, GRIP feedback can enlighten others.

To better control spending in the case of pre-proposals that may die on the vine, only two hours of work are initially permitted by any GRIP member on any pre-proposal where help is requested. Any further hours up to a maximum of 10 (including the first 2) need the approval of the author or at least one other GRIP member.

(Following the submission of a bill in August for 4.5 hours of artwork, the two-hour rule was extended to artwork and editing.)

The fact is that GRIP experts are very active in the community and historically have authored, and continue to author, many proposals. Their proposals - and by extension, the DAO - benefit from the feedback of other GRIP experts, same as proposals by any other community member. As GRIP work - expert feedback, artwork and editing - is public or accessible, the value-add is visible to all; the community therefore can judge whether GRIP is providing a useful service to the DAO, even when those services are provided to GRIP members.

While GRIP members alone have used GRIP services over the last two months, a review shows that since GRIP’s inception last November, other community members have been the main beneficiaries.

Recipients of GRIP help prior to July:

Non-GRIP members:

  • PNF with ARR
  • Compare Nodes
  • Shedding Light Onto the Dark Forest pre-proposal by 0xMo0nR3kt3r
  • Addi/Thunderhead with PoktInfo reimbursement pre-proposal
  • Encode Bootcamp pre-proposal
  • MSA’s SER (before MSA joined GRIP)
  • @crabmans Relay Driven Inflation (RDI)
  • PoktScan’s Geo-Mesh Reimbursement pre-proposal (Jorge and Michael O’Rourke Sr.)
  • PoktBlade with Chocolate Rain and LeanPokt reimbursement pre-proposal

GRIP members:

  • Cryptocorn’s pre-proposals SALES and ACCURATE
  • Shane’s pre-proposal BASH

The recent drop in community involvement in proposal development may be due to the crypto-wide downturn and/or lower Pocket node-runner rewards and dismal token price. It’s a fair bet that market upturn will see more proposals from non-GRIP members and greater demand for GRIP help.

One of the main ideas behind GRIP was to promote and widen participation of community members in proposal creation. If community interest in proposal creation does not revive, what will that mean for GRIP? Should it evolve and adapt or go the way of the dodo? I will lay out my thoughts shortly. What do others think?


GRIP Report no. 5: September 1-30 and Review of Latest 6-Month Trial Period

At the end of the monthly review for September that follows, this post considers the entire GRIP experiment, focusing on the recent 6-month trial period.

This post does not end with a request for further renewal. Instead, it concludes with a request for community feedback. GRIP will mull its fate based on that feedback.

Assistance Requests

In September, there were no new pre-proposals. Although a few proposals were posted, no authors asked GRIP for help. However, PNF requested that GRIP provide infographics for its 3D Governance PGOV1 - Evolving Pocket’s Governance: Introducing 3D Governance - Foundation - Pocket Network Forum proposal (posted in August). The infographic work was done in September (Ale, Cryptocorn and zaatar).

GRIP bill to DAO

GRIP’s bill for September totals $909.50.

Here is the breakdown:

What Details Author Feedback Amount Billed
GRIP Help Infographic (3D Governance) Helpful
GRIP Admin Prepare report on September activity and review of 6-mo. trial period
GRIP Expenses Adobe Illustrator subscription September 2023 $29.50

GRIP Comprehensive Review

GRIP’s six-month trial period ended October 7, 2023. Its first trial period lasted three months, November 2022 to March 2023.

As detailed below, GRIP did achieve its main goals:

  1. create a system to compensate community experts for the time they take to provide meaningful feedback on technical and economic proposals;
  • The feedback and other help provided by GRIP was, with few exceptions, rated helpful or very helpful. No compensation was sought or awarded for unsolicited expert feedback by non-GRIP members. The one non-GRIP member who had requested the community to pay for unsought feedback joined GRIP, thus helping to entrench the process for compensation only for pre-requested feedback on pre-proposals and proposals.
  1. help proposal preparation including by first timers, thereby broadening community participation;
  • GRIP did assist with proposal preparation including for several first timers (as detailed in post dated September 19, immediately above).
  1. make proposals clearer and easier to grasp and thereby help DAO members understand proposals requiring their vote, thereby enhancing governance;
  • GRIP editing improved proposals and made them easier to understand, including via infographics (3D Governance and Payments Negating Favouritism).

This observation, made in August, is valid. Only if demand for its services by community members outside GRIP resumes would it make sense to renew GRIP in its current form.

Goodbye GRIP?

Community proposal activity has dropped, in part due to PNF taking over most of the work in the ecosystem.

Has the time has come for GRIP to say goodbye? Take a pause? Or reinvent itself?

Areas Where GRIP Services Can Meet a Need

GRIP brings proven community expertise, editing and artistic skills that can complement those of PNF and individual builders. Here are four areas where GRIP, or some reformulation of GRIP, could continue to meet real needs:

  • Work on community-related proposals and publications by PNF

GRIP has shown that it can provide value-add to PNF proposals and other documentation. It has provided editing and infographics, most recently on 3D Governance. PNF, and by extension, the community would benefit from the continuation of such assistance.

  • POP work

Moving forward, we can expect the big contributions to the Pocket ecosystem to be in the form of Pocket Open Priorities or POPs. POP authors competing for PNF-funded work could tap GRIP’s services, including technical expertise, to strengthen their proposals. Or, once a contract is awarded, depending on the nature of the work, GRIP members could help with editing and artwork/infographics (e.g., website redesign). Contract applicants or winners could pay for this work or it could be covered or subsidized by the DAO based on the reasoning that POPs resemble proposals whose refinement (pre-selection) and implementation (post-selection) benefit the ecosystem at large.

  • DAO voting

As long as the Pocket network continues, the DAO will be asked to vote on proposals including those advanced by PNF, such as those related to 3D Governance. Hence, there will always be a need for editing and occasional infographics to make proposals clearer.

  • Community Proposals

While community proposal activity has declined, it has not stopped completely. Not surprisingly given their high level of Pocket knowledge and expertise, GRIP members have continued to author proposals and pre-proposals over the last few months - e.g., Shane’s GANDALF (Decrease Maximum Chains), Bulutcambazi’s PIP-31 (Unleashing the Potential of POKT) and Cryptocorn’s Regulating Sockets (REGS). In future, community members outside GRIP might also come up with proposals and pre-proposals.

The community benefits when these undergo expert review, editing and occasionally, addition of infographics, even when the author is a GRIP member. While the optics of GRIP getting paid to help other GRIP members could be better, the benefit to the community justifies the provision of this assistance. (GRIP help was not requested for GANDALF or PIP-31.) To improve the optics, the hourly pay-rate for GRIP help to other GRIP members would top out at $100 (in a possible renewal proposal); there would be no bonus for work deemed “very helpful.”


In sum, there remains a need for editing and, occasionally, artwork to make all votable proposals more digestible. In addition, GRIP’s services, including its expert feedback. could be leveraged in new ways.

GRIP was a grassroots community initiative, reflective of Pocket’s decentralized ethos. Now that the number of independent node runners has dropped, an entity like GRIP can help keep the decentralization flame burning.

Your Input, Please

GRIP needs to hear what the community thinks before determining whether to close its doors, seek renewal, or reformulate itself.

In the meantime, GRIP will continue to provide assistance if requested. Payment for any such work will be requested - and put to a vote - once GRIP decides on its future by year’s end or sooner.

(Before its fate is decided GRIP could be asked to do infographic work. For now, therefore, it will maintain its Adobe Illustrator subscription at a cost of $29.50 per month.)