Hey @kukabi, would be interested in your thoughts on an open source contributor funding process that I recently shared and also for contribution verification the usage of individual monthly contribution logs.
When you’re suggesting the fund is seeking capital returns for sustainable funding why do you think this is an optimal approach? If a financial return to the fund is expected then this reduces the incentive to create open source software. Open source software creates a return on investment for the wider ecosystem by making the ecosystem more useful that can increase the amount of adoption and network usage. This could increase the probability that the projects being funded need to introduce some form of token to achieve that outcome by trying to capture some value. They might need to do this even in situations where a token might not be necessary or useful over the long term.
You might not have meant that it needs to be a direct capital return on investment so please clarify if so!
In either event, would be great to see these two funding approaches competing with one another. I believe funding open source initiatives that benefit the wider ecosystem to increase the networks value will likely be the more effective and efficient solution, it can help to create compounding benefits for the users and ecosystem developers due to the shared open source code.