This is a report on our voting rationale back till September/2025.
We’ve been staking RIF, active in the DAO, forum discussions and voted in all of the proposals since Dec/2024.
[2508 Grant] Infrastructure Ventures Path to Ecosystem Growth
Sep 2nd
Voted: FOR
Ratinale: Although I felt like the proposal missed some key details, a more specific objective and differentiator from what the Rootstock Collective is, I’ve known Francisco and Infrastructure Ventures from past professional interactions and I know how Infrastructure Ventures approaches and helps early-stage proejcts. I decided to give them a credit they would run a proper accelerator program, helping builders in stages too early to apply for DAO funding.
Ultimately the proposal was not approved and I offered Infrastructure Ventures feeedback on what I think was missing and how they could design a better prooposal and re-apply in the future, which I understand they plan on doing.
Winks.fun: On-chain actions on Rootstock within Twitter
Sep 15th
Voted: FOR
Rationale: The discussions in Discourse were very productive in polishing the proposal and clarifying all questions I had.
X/Twitter is clearly at the forefront of crypto culture and adoption, representing by far the main social network in this area.
An easy solution for transacting directly within X/Twitter can be a very powerful vector of adoption.
BUILDING ROOTSTOCK COMMUNITY OF DEVELOPERS AND USERS IN GHANA
Sep 16th
Voted: AGAINST
At first, the KYB was not properly filled, and after tihs was solved, the proper request values were not filled, so we voted against, so that the proposal could be properly corrected and resubmitted.
[2510] Grant Proposal - Rootstock Ecosystem Roadshow: Workshops & Adoption in Bitcoin Events
Sep 26th
Voted: FOR
Rationale: The proposal was solid, the team has a good track record, the Values requested made sense, and I think this project has the potential to draw new users to Rootstock ecosystem.
[2509 Grant Proposal] Searching for Collective Ambassadors
Sep 29th
Voted: FOR
Rationale: Previous experience with local ambassadors was deemed positive, and it makes sense to expand it to these important economic areas and crypto hubs in Dubai/Abu Dhabi and Hong Kong or Singapore. The values are small, the duration is small and can always be evaluated and extended or abandoned as needed.
[0907 Grant Proposal] Rootstock QuestHub - M2
Sep 30th
Voted: FOR
Rationale: The original proposal was solid and had the potential to onboard new users into or expand usage of current users in Rootstock ecosystem. QuestHub communicated well, delivered Milestone 1, and was ready for requesting Milestone 2.
[2508 Grant Proposal] All-or-Nothing Crowdfunding with Rootstock - Milestone 2
Oct 2nd
Voted: FOR
Rationale: The original proposal was solid and had the potential to onboard new builders and investors and support new projects in Rootstock ecosystem. The team communicated well, delivered Milestone 1, and was ready for requesting Milestone 2.
[2508 Grant] Fund the NetX State platform MVP on Rootstock and support the first two local node activation
Oct 2nd
Voted: AGAINST
Rationale: While I’m an enthusiast of Network State projects, by being close to some of them, I can see they are complex, capital intensive, multi-year projects, with really no guarantee of success. They need to show momentum, traction, innovation, adoption, to the community and local governments and institutions alike, as they need to coexist harmoniously with their geographical surroundings. As such, benefit to Rootstock ecosystem was very uncertain, and even if realized, it could take many years.
I think the proposal was not mature enough for funding, with Milestone 1 being a market research and initial product concept and design. We voted against and recommended the ream look for either having a clearer vision and product-market fit, or looking for acceleration programs which provide multi-week, multi-disciplinary support for designing the product and getting ready for funding.
