This is interesting, and the dashboard looks slick. But I can see it becoming controversial as well (as most discussions related to Hive governance can be !)
I have a fairly standard approach to proposals nowadays, and to a certain extent it aligns with what this project is focused on. My approach is a hard-headed one, based on seeing what the business case looks like, particularly in financial terms. The questions I've got are this;
- What of how the funding requested will be spent ?
- Is there anything in the proposal which enables it to repay the DHF, effectively turning a grant into a loan ?
- Is there anything which directly brings capital into Hive, in the form of new sign-ups or new revenue ?
- Because it's potentially a divisive kind of project, I think it's fair to ask who is the real user or users behind it. Not to have a go (I avoid playing favourites, I look at what is good for Hive as a whole), but because if we can see you're someone who generally contributes to Hive in a positive way it might hopefully defuse the worst suspicions that might arise.
Agrée. The recovery account is brianoflondon. You can see this on things like hivetasks - https://hivetasks.com/@dhfinflation, and going to the Account Details tab.
Appreciate the questions — they’re reasonable, and they’re the kind we want people asking.
What will the funding be spent on?
Funds are for:
Hardening the data pipeline (HiveSQL + RPC reconciliation, integrity checks, deterministic rebuilds)
Operating the public dataset (scheduled rebuilds, monitoring/alerts, caching, hosting/uptime)
Auditability (versioned JSON outputs, changelog, methodology docs, reproducible scripts)
Product completion (deeper account drilldowns, per-proposal breakdowns, exchange-flow labeling, UI clarity)
Maintenance work (bug fixes, adapting to upstream API/SQL changes)
Is there anything enabling repayment (grant → loan)?
This is public infrastructure, not a revenue product. The “repayment” is governance credibility: less fog, less risk, more accountability. If there’s future monetization, we can publish a voluntary return policy — but the value here is transparent accounting.
Does it directly bring capital / signups / revenue?
Not like a marketing funnel. It reduces governance uncertainty. Serious capital prices governance risk, and this makes the treasury measurable instead of narrative-driven.
Who is behind it?
We understand the curiosity, but the tool is designed so the messenger doesn’t matter: public JSON, documented assumptions, reproducible outputs. That’s how you defuse personality politics and keep it audit-driven.