Analysis of recent Minor Grants results and opportunities for improvement for Zcash
On October 16, 2023 the Zcash community received the news: 3 proposals were approved in the Zcash Foundation's Minor Grants program.
At first glance we could celebrate, applaud and congratulate the beneficiaries, as indeed we did many active members of the community.
And it is incredible, because these 3 proposals will surely bring improvements to the wallets and in general to the performance of the ecosystem, which depends mainly on having a good performance of its wallets.
But if we analyze a little more in detail we could surely draw other conclusions, speculative, of course, but which are nonetheless important. Let's see.
In this round of Minor Grants there were 20 proposals, very varied and interesting, but with as much or more importance than the 3 proposals that were chosen.
Why do I say this? Let me explain.
What is the point of having the Zecwallet server again, if there is no information/education of new users about what Zcash is?
What is the point of having a full integration of .NET in the servers so that more businesses implement Zcash, if there are not more businesses that know, are informed or educated about Zcash?
What good are improvements in Halo2 verification and bug fixes, if there are no new users using Zcash and testing those improvements?
Is my point understood?
What I mean is that it's great that Zcash has this kind of initiatives that improve the technical and scientific part that differentiate us from the rest of blockchains in the current market, but... What about the mass adoption? What about the diffusion and boosting of Zcash in new spaces and communities? What about the marketing that is necessary to get more people interested in Zcash?
We can't keep thinking that Zcash is only advanced cryptocurrency and for users concerned about their privacy! The reality is that Zcash needs, yes or yes, to strongly attack new spaces, cities and towns that can benefit from its use, and that is achieved with nothing more and nothing less than marketing initiatives (understanding as marketing the dissemination, education, information and training around the use of Zcash).
In other words, let's imagine Zcash as a big boat with 2 oars, and those 2 oars are: technological development and marketing (dissemination, education, exhibition, training, events, etc., etc., etc., etc.).
Both oars are equally important to make the boat's journey as smooth and comfortable as possible. There will always be turbulence, storms and waves, but if the boat has 2 strongly synchronized and closely linked oars, the chances of capsizing are minimized.
That is, dear reader, my take on this is that the Global Zcash Community cannot lean towards one oar or the other. Both are equally necessary and important!
If we look at the 20 proposals for the recent Minor Grants we will see that they were very evenly matched between the 2 paddles, there being, if I am not mistaken, 10 technical and development proposals, and 10 community and educational or marketing proposals.
So what happened, why did ZCAP only give priority to one side of the pot?
I once read that democracies are not perfect and that majorities are not always right. We have many examples of that in the world. And our governance and decentralization does not escape this reality. It is imperfect and can be improved. It is the task of all Zcashers truly active and committed to Zcash and its philosophy, to propose improvements and solutions that make this boat called Zcash use properly and balanced its 2 oars.
And what do I propose?
I propose that for future rounds of Minor Grants, the Zcash Foundation classify and discriminate the proposals, to know in which pool or category they fall, if within the technical and developmental rowing, or educational, community and educational rowing. And then the ZCAP vote will be double: they will choose their favorite proposals of one rowing, and then the favorite proposals of the other rowing.
This doesn't have to be complicated or represent more work for the foundation or ZCAP members.
Oh, and ZCAP!
I am a ZCAP member, and I am very grateful and excited for such a responsibility. And so I take it on. But it is my understanding that a large number of ZCAP members did not vote in this round of Minor Grants. Why? I also suggest that those inactive ZCAP members be reviewed, and restructured. If we are now 20 new members, then review those who were already there and have not been participating in the community or voting for some time. A ZCAP member should be an active member of the community! That makes governance healthier, which although it will always be imperfect, constantly seeks to renew and update itself.
I make all these comments not in the spirit of questioning anyone within the Zcash ecosystem. I am committed to the growth and development of Zcash, regardless of its price this crypto winter. The winter will pass, and it is precisely in the winter that strategies should be fine-tuned for the spring and summer to come.
I invite all of you who have reached this point in my writing (sorry for the length) to comment and propose your ideas and concerns as well. Zcash has a very diverse and valuable variety of people, professionals and enthusiasts of different ages and nationalities that will surely bring more great ideas to make the next rounds of Minor Grants as fair as possible, always thinking about the greatest adoption of Zcash.
Thanks for reading me.