appreciate the visual representation and i do get where you are coming from to a degree. I just think personally that the end user vp outside delegation has not risen enough to warrant it. Besides certain whales delegating to the community and some community members reaching out to projects i dont think voter vp has risen enough to warrant it. It will further the divide from new user and middle user to whales and those delegated by whales. Ive told you this stuff before tho. Also should be noted tho that the way some people been trying to manipulate the dao it could be argued. Out side the one hand washing the other the whales could be possibly needed here need to maintain. Seems like some people want to destroy the dao through manipulative schemes and try to take it over thinking its fn cute or possible. This weighs heavy on the mind.

[quote="TheCryptoTengu, post:3, topic:16987"] I dont agree with the new vp limits being raised at this time. I think it hurts the community more then it helps. [/quote] The changes are not that big compared to current standards, maybe this graph illustrates it better.  [quote="dax, post:4, topic:16987"] I’d like to see more of the arguments for and against giving grants in MANA vs stablecoins. [/quote] There is just one big argument, MANA is a volatile asset. For short projects this might not be an issue, and that's why the lower tiers now enables payments in MANA for up to $20,000 worth of USD. However, for long projects is fundamental to secure a budget in USD in order to honor commitments made with contractors and third parties. I like the idea to incentivize the request for grants in MANA, but I would keep it simple for this iteration. [quote="Doug-NFTWorld, post:6, topic:16987"] Agree with VP/USD concept but we have to find a reasonable threshold. 10M VP for a $240k grant? I havent seen any proposal even get 10M votes yet. I’d like to see some stats on the following (or point me to where I can collect this myself): 1. How many proposals have received over 4M votes so far? (probably very few) 2. What was the average VP by user of those proposals that passed with over 4M votes? (probably very high due to whale votes required for passing them) 3. What is the median user VP of ALL proposals? (the median is probably very small, especially in relation to the average that top tier proposals receive) [/quote] There are 31 proposals that passed with more than 10M VP. There are 117 proposals that passed with more than 4M VP. For the other two points, I invite you to do your own research using the [transparency data sheet](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FoV7TdMTVnqVOZoV4bvVdHWkeu4sMH5JEhp8L0Shjlo/edit#gid=2005979023), or the CSV exported by the [transparency OS](https://decentraland.org/blog/announcements/dao-transparency-os/). [quote="Doug-NFTWorld, post:9, topic:16987, full:true"] Perhaps the community should be allowed to provide some input and help draft Governance proposals in the first place before they are put up for a vote. [/quote] The proposal was opened for [public comment](https://forum.decentraland.org/t/draft-restructuring-the-grants-program/16810) in the forum first and later discussed here. I'm glad for all the contributions received and the signaling looks favorable. I'll move it to a Governance Proposal.

DAO Grants Program - New Tiers & VP Threshold This proposal is now in status: PASSED. Voting Results: * Yes 96% 5,522,572 VP (48 votes) * No 4% 231,735 VP (2 votes)

Perhaps the community should be allowed to provide some input and help draft Governance proposals in the first place before they are put up for a vote.

I wonder if its possible for us to workshop these items if/after the draft proposal passes, so we can come to a consensus on if/how they should be applied, without the need for having separate proposals for each one.

Each of these should be separate proposals for us to vote on independently of each other, rather than all lumped together: * Adjust the minimum VP threshold required to pass a small-tier grant. * Make the VP threshold variable based on the requested amount; the more money you need, the more VP is needed. * Allow more flexible vesting schedules to support different kinds of projects (longer and shorter than 6 months).

Agree with VP/USD concept but we have to find a reasonable threshold. 10M VP for a $240k grant? I havent seen any proposal even get 10M votes yet. I'd like to see some stats on the following (or point me to where I can collect this myself): 1. How many proposals have received over 4M votes so far? (probably very few) 2. What was the average VP by user of those proposals that passed with over 4M votes? (probably very high due to whale votes required for passing them) 3. What is the median user VP of ALL proposals? (the median is probably very small, especially in relation to the average that top tier proposals receive) Increasing VP/USD higher than it is currently will give the whales even more power/control and will further discourage the little guys from voting.

Sounds great! I think the dynamic tiers are a great improvement.

I'd like to see more of the arguments for and against giving grants in MANA vs stablecoins. @HPrivakos [mentioned this the other day](https://discord.com/channels/894658869391933540/894658869391933543/1049683951947628585) and @champ has brought it up as well. I tend to think it's better to denominate grants in MANA, or maybe grants denominated in MANA have a more favorable VP formula (1.2M + Total Budget + X VP/MANA)

Voting yes but i want this documented so im making the comment I dont agree with the new vp limits being raised at this time. I think it hurts the community more then it helps. Changing of quarterly allowances ,vesting contract and categories was more needed.

Thanks for all the comments and feedback shared on the forum post. https://forum.decentraland.org/t/draft-restructuring-the-grants-program/16810