Edits to the proposal, 16 September, after #3. My edit window on the opening post has closed, so this post is the edit record: the passages below replace the corresponding ones in the opening post, and where the two differ, this post governs. Two changes: the M4 amount is sized to day-90 TVL instead of all-or-nothing, with the wording that says how the day-90 figure is read and reported, and a dated paragraph on the Blockscout pilot goes under Demand validation. Nothing else in the proposal changes. In the passages below, #3 is @Kaf_Anode’s post in this thread; #11 and #23 are posts in the sanity-check thread linked in the opening post. Once the Milestone 1 on-chain proposal is filed, neither the opening post nor this edit record changes; anything after that goes in a reply, and each on-chain proposal’s text and amount match this thread.
Header block (the first paragraph)
What this vote approves. Strategic tier, up to USD 25,000 in USDRIF, four on-chain milestones: 5,000 / 10,000 / 2,500 / up to 7,500. Initial tranche 20%. The 30% terminal tranche is withheld until a post-completion impact review, and the amount released from it is sized to day-90 TVL (edited 16 September, after #3 in this thread). The money pays a fixed-price audit at cost and ninety days of audited mainnet operation of an immutable rBTC vault. No further tranche is requested if any gate fails.
Summary (the whole paragraph; the last two sentences change)
An immutable ERC-4626 vault for rBTC that deposits into the LayerBank and Sovryn lending venues, rebalances permissionlessly between them, and cannot be paused, upgraded or patched after deployment. The code is frozen at tag audit-2026-07, the audit firm is selected and its terms are published on its own site, KYB is complete, and a signed integrator LOI is attached. USD 15,000 of the grant is a pass-through to Coinspect at cost. Up to USD 10,000 pays for two mainnet deployments of the audited code, a 60-day capped Phase 0 with public pass/fail gates, ninety days of reporting, and handover. USD 7,500 of that is withheld until the impact review is done, and the amount released is sized to TVL at the day-90 snapshot: nothing below USD 10,000 of TVL, the full USD 7,500 at USD 50,000 or more.
Demand validation (V3.3 Section 3.1) (a new paragraph after the LOI paragraph, and the routes line)
Edited 16 September, after #3. The named-integrator evidence Section 3.1 asks for is the signed letter in the opening post, dated 10 July 2026. What has changed since: Blockscout’s Global Wallet pilot ended with its final report on 29 July 2026 ([2512 Grant 1] RootStock Global Wallet by Blockscout - #43 by AndrewG). The report says they faced challenges attracting dapps to the product, that they are winding the pilot down, and that funding the wallet’s ongoing costs is now the community’s call. The letter is non-binding by its own terms, and I cannot promise the service stays up; by that report, whether it does is a funding question for the Rootstock community. The rBTC vault has no privileged role and nothing gates who integrates it: the integrator package under M2 publishes the client code, the ABI and the address manifest another wallet would need. No payment gate depends on this route (question 4 under Performance targets).
Depositors are reached through three routes: the Blockscout wallet surface, for as long as it runs; this forum and the Collective’s channels; and direct deposits from Rootstock builders who put in their own funds.
Grant request and milestones (first paragraph, the M4 row of the milestone table, and the two paragraphs under the table)
Total up to USD 25,000, requested in USDRIF, one on-chain proposal per tranche. The 20% initial tranche and the 30% terminal tranche are percentages of the approved USD 25,000; a smaller M4 reduces what is drawn, not what was approved, and the month-twelve target stays USD 50,000 either way. The 30% terminal tranche follows V3.3: it is withheld until the post-completion impact review, and the amount released from it is sized to day-90 TVL, up to the full USD 7,500 (edited 16 September, after #3).
| Thread name | On-chain milestone | Amount | Releases on | Deliverables and evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| M4 | Milestone 4 | up to USD 7,500 of the 30% terminal tranche, sized to day-90 TVL, see Performance targets | day 90 after the Phase 0 deployment, then the post-completion impact review that V3.3 attaches to the terminal tranche; the snapshot block, the close, the per-holder figures and the arithmetic go into this thread before the on-chain proposal is filed, and the on-chain amount is that number | post-Phase-0 instance, 5 rBTC cap, deployed at the same post-fix commit, Blockscout-verified; TVL floor (below) met at the day-90 snapshot; final report with the metrics (below); public dashboard; operator runbook and monitoring handed over; third-venue readiness assessment |
M1a plus M1b is USD 15,000, Coinspect’s fee, invoiced at cost. If the final invoice is below USD 15,000, that total shrinks to the invoice. The rest, up to USD 10,000 across M2 and M4, is all my work. In rough shares: remediation and re-review handling, a quarter; both deployments, Phase 0 operation and the weekly invariant runs, a third; the dashboard and the integrator package, a quarter; documentation, runbook, monitoring handover and the final report, the rest. Hardening already merged is not billed. M2 and M3 from the sanity-check thread’s opening post are merged into one milestone because neither could release before Phase 0 ends, and a separate on-chain vote for half of USD 2,500 serves nobody. M4 keeps its name because the sanity-check thread refers to it by that name. I receive nothing between the audit report and day 60 after deployment, by design.
If any Phase 0 gate fails, I do not request another tranche. Tranche release is the DAO’s call at every step. If M4 is not requested, the day-90 work is still delivered and still public: the final report, the dashboard, the operator runbook and monitoring handed over as the Trust model section of the opening post describes, and the third-venue readiness assessment. The dashboard and the weekly invariant workflow stay up through month twelve either way; only the payment is conditional (edited 16 September, after #3).
Phase 0 gates (the wallet-exclusion paragraph)
My own deposits, and deposits from any wallet I control or fund, count toward neither the ten depositors nor the day-90 TVL figure, which is the figure tested against the M4 floor and used to set the M4 amount (edited 16 September, after #3). The wallets I control or fund are listed on the dashboard and in this thread; the list in force at a snapshot is posted before that snapshot, and wallets are added to it, never removed.
Performance targets and success metrics (items 1, 3, 4 and 5; item 2 is unchanged)
1. 90-day TVL target. The payment floor is the BEAR figure from #11: USD 10,000 equivalent across the two audited rBTC instances at the day-90 snapshot. The snapshot block is the last Rootstock block of the 90th calendar day after the day of the Phase 0 deployment transaction, UTC, and the price is the BTC/USD CoinMarketCap daily close for that same UTC day. The figure is the sum of convertToAssets(balanceOf(h)) at that block over every share holder h in both instances, excluding wallets I control or fund; the holder list, the per-wallet figures and the arithmetic are published with it. The targets stay as in #11: BASE USD 50,000 to 150,000, BULL USD 250,000 to 400,000. The BEAR floor is a payment floor at day 90, not the FES measurement, which runs to month twelve. On TVL alone, the BASE lower bound of USD 50,000 sits on the 2.0× line with no margin. BEAR is 0.4× against the full USD 25,000. Edited 16 September, after #3: M4 is no longer all-or-nothing at the BEAR floor. Below USD 10,000 at the day-90 snapshot, M4 is not requested. At or above it, the amount requested is USD 7,500 × TVL / USD 50,000, rounded down to whole USD and capped at USD 7,500: USD 1,500 at USD 10,000, USD 3,750 at USD 25,000, USD 7,500 at USD 50,000 or more. USD 50,000 is the divisor because it is the BASE lower bound above, the point where on TVL alone this grant sits on the 2.0× line; above it more TVL adds nothing to the ask. The snapshot block, the close, the per-holder figures and the arithmetic go into this thread before the M4 on-chain proposal is filed, the on-chain proposal carries the same figure in its text and links that post, and the on-chain amount is that number. The snapshot is that one block: TVL moving after it does not change the amount in either direction. Whatever is not requested is not deferred to a later milestone. For the impact review, the targets committed on M4 are this rule and the deliverables in the M4 row above; the month-twelve Value Commitment Plan is measured at month twelve, after this grant closes. BASE is still what the integration is built to reach. The second instance deploys after the day-60 gates pass, so at the day-90 snapshot it has about thirty days of history. That figure, for the floor and for the amount alike, is measured across both instances anyway. If the Collective prefers to measure the second instance at its own day 90, say so in this thread and I will move the snapshot. That is settled in this thread before the Milestone 1 on-chain proposal is filed; after that, the snapshot rule does not move, because under a sized M4 moving the snapshot moves the amount.
3. Retention and recurrence. Reported at day 90, with targets, not as payment gates: at least half of the Phase 0 depositors still hold shares in either instance; at least half of day-90 TVL has been in the vault for 30 days or more; the number of wallets with two or more deposits; wallets with repeat on-chain activity over 30 days, the V3.3 anti-gaming definition; the largest single holder’s share of the day-90 figure, and how much of that figure was deposited in the final seven days. The M4 gate is the TVL floor plus the qualitative deliverables, with no retention metric added, because a retention gate on a dozen wallets would pay or withhold up to USD 7,500 on noise.
4. If the integrator route underdelivers. The LOI is evidence of integrator demand at the time it was signed, in July 2026. The gates do not depend on that route staying available. The Phase 0 depositor gate and the day-90 TVL figure, which sets both the M4 floor test and the M4 amount, are measured on chain regardless of which route deposits come through. If the floor is not met, M4 is not requested, whatever the reason, and above it the amount follows that same on-chain figure (edited 16 September, after #3).
5. Split of the ask, up to USD 25,000. USD 15,000 audits the reusable core, the vault design and adapter pattern every later deployment inherits. Up to USD 10,000 delivers the rBTC deployments and their ninety days, with USD 7,500 of it sized to day-90 TVL. USD 0 goes to the DOC deployment in this grant.
Timeline (the day-90 line)
- Day 90 after deployment: M4 snapshot, final report, handover, impact review. M4 requested at the amount the snapshot sets, if the floor is met.
Differences (two bullets)
-
Phase 0 gates bind M2 and M4, not M1 (#23). Per-depositor minimum (0.001 rBTC, held at the assessment snapshot) added to the depositor gate. Wallets I control or fund excluded from the depositor count and from the day-90 TVL figure that sets both the M4 floor test and the M4 amount (this proposal).
-
M4 TVL floor defined on the rBTC deployments, not DOC (this proposal, changes #11). M4 releases after the V3.3 impact review. M4 amount sized to day-90 TVL between USD 10,000 and USD 50,000 instead of all-or-nothing at USD 10,000 (edited 16 September, after #3).