Celo Regional DAOs: A Retrospective on 2024

Ecosystem DAOs
, ,
13

Hello @NikoG the retrospective on the Celo Regional DAOs for 2024 provides valuable insights, and the following feedback and clarifications are offered on key points:

Celo Korea

It is noted that Celo Korea did not request additional funding in 2024. More information about the current state of the Korean community would be appreciated, including updates, initiatives, or challenges they may be facing. Insights into their progress since the last report would be particularly helpful.

Celo Africa

In 2024, Celo Africa received $311,200 USD.

The Celo Africa team is commended for their active engagement and transparency. Their detailed reports and ongoing progress are recognized and appreciated.

Celo Europe

In 2024, Celo Europe received $246,250 USD.

The Celo EU team is commended for their active engagement and transparency. Their detailed reports and ongoing progress are recognized and appreciated.

General Feedback

A comparative overview of the initiatives undertaken by each regional DAO is recommended. This would facilitate the exchange of experiences, best practices, and lessons learned while helping to prevent recurring challenges across regions. Future reports involving multiple regional DAOs could benefit from incorporating interviews or direct feedback from the respective teams, providing richer and more actionable insights for the Celo ecosystem and the broader blockchain community.

CeLatAm

We would like to highlight the case of CeLatAm because it was the second DAO created and it received significant funding. The fact that they have not requested additional funds makes it appear that they are responsibly managing their funds.

  • Celo LatAm received an approval funding of 903,000 Celo in 2023 but did not request additional funds in 2024, spending $70,000 USD instead.
  • To improve clarity @NikoG, it is suggested that the column title “Budget Received” be adjusted to “Budget Spent,” or that CeLatAm be removed from that table and be treated as a different case.

In Summary:

However, quickly looking at their report, there are some aspects that seem unclear. Would you, @CeLatam, please clarify?

Season 0 vs. Season 1 Expense Report

  • The “Expenses” table for Season 0 and Season 1 appears identical, with the only difference being the cUSD rate adjustment. This change resulted in a variation in the percentage spent 22.7% for Season 1 and 15.34% for Season 0. If there were significant updates or changes between Season 0 and Season 1, highlighting them in the expense report would provide valuable context.

The retrospective report is comprehensive and much appreciated. Continued progress and updates from all regional DAOs are anticipated as they advance their respective initiatives.

1 Like