FundOSS Round Deux: Features, Failures and Fixes

[BenJam]

I'm dropping an issue here to compile feature requests, issues that were highlighted and potential fixes. I'll probably break this issue out into other issues once we get into prioritisation:

Ideas

• open the campaign to all projects (on open collective)
• folks would like closer integration to open collective, specifically they would like donations to register on their collectives as they do with open collective normally.
• folks would like to receive the details of folks that contributed so they can keep them up to date and/or say thank you (may pair well with tighter integration)
• folks wondered whether a pre-paid gift card could be distributed to a team members to vote (and donate) to the campaign
• grouping projects with others like it, either ahead of schedule (tagging on open collective is a thing) alongside emergent behaviour throughout the round.
• donate outside of the campaign (i.e. contribute on open collective via fundoss)
• Encourage recurring contributions as a part of the campaign
• Provide a link to Open Collective pages on project pages

Issues

• folks saw matching amounts going down throughout the campaign, leading to them waiting for it to go back up (ohai crypto hangovers)
• some thought that the format was still too competitive, I wondered whether we might be able to balance that with a more intentional release of funds from the fund over time.
• folks needed to get a copy of their donation receipts after the campaign had closed
• Some folks were a little worried about payment security. Branding the payment gateway provider (strip) and/or adding other third party platforms (Paypal, digital wallets) would increase confidence
• some projects are requesting receipts for their donations, with company details etc on them. Could we regenerate them with this information on (Open Source Collective can be the org issuing)

[gusaus]

Great list @BenJam! If I could add a couple other ideas

• Enable people to donate with stocks (to participants and/or the matching fund) https://blog.opencollective.com/use-your-stock-for-good/
• Provide a way for participants to find contributors (developers, project manager, fundraising, docs, etc.)
• Enable collectives and orgs to use the platform for their own fundraising; for example, large communities like Drupal and WordPress could curate/run their own program; nonprofit or verticals like community media, performing arts, education, etc; location based fundraisers, etc.

Many of these ideas are relevant to the Open Collective product and are similar to what I previously logged here opencollective/opencollective#2232 (comment)

[gusaus]

This will probably increase donations from the Gitcoin/Bitcoin/Web 3.0. communities for subsequent FundOSS campaigns https://blog.opencollective.com/support-open-source-software-using-crypto/

[gusaus]

The following site provides some really nice inspiration for both the FundOSS and Open Collective platforms - here is some functionality 'not' yet listed above.

• Sort filter -
  • All nonprofits https://giveguide.org/nonprofits
  • Category - https://giveguide.org/nonprofits/categories
  • Tags - https://giveguide.org/nonprofits?categories=&tags=new,bipoc-led-organization
• Category page - for example https://giveguide.org/categories/creative-expression
  • donate to multiple orgs and your shopping cart is updated w/o leaving the page.
  • tally donors, nonprofits, $$ donated.
  • Display category sponsors - what if there was a way to automate that? maybe could do with the projects feature?
• Project page - for example https://giveguide.org/nonprofits/open-signal
  • allow projects to set funding goal (and display progress)
  • add to favorites
  • display category sponsors

[gusaus]

Circling back to this issue as I mentioned FundOSS as a potential project for the OSC Working Group that's taking shape in #opensource (Open Collective Slack).

@BenJam mentioned the following when it came up as a potential program -

On the funding side, and I think i’ve said this before, I think FundOSS is the wrong format for a fundraising campaign. I don’t like the competitive nature of having a funding pool which is split based on the success of individual projects to campaign well. So that won’t be coming back without some fundamental changes made.

This was my response from the same Slack discussion

Just will point out the feedback on the competitive nature was provided by the same maintainer/project that inspired my original call to action (check the very top for a refresher:point_up:). I'm not going to bring Buster or the AzuraCast team members into this discussion (they don't have capacity beyond just keeping the project and themselves sustained) but I can convey their goals and needs as I've been working them (sort of as their wannabe sustainer) in #openproducer as well as their very large Discord community.

Based on pre/post FundOSS discussions, I think AzuraCast, Kendraio (Kendraio's lead Daniel was the other person providing similar feedback) and other projects I helped onboard all benefited and would participate in future rounds (which seemed to be the plan coming out of the wrap up call and this issue). My takeaway from participating in the call and subsequent discussions was that cost and team capacity were the main reasons for the delay.

To me (especially when considering all the success OSC's partner has had with Gitcoin Grants, we could solve problems with the funding model and contribute to platform improvements by 1) looping in some of the original partners at Gitcoin and 2) engaging community contributors/partners/funders via the working group we're now in the process of forming. 🎉

[ocdtrekkie]

Okay, I thought a bit about the good parts and bad parts after talking with and reading the comments from @gusaus and @BenJam.

Things that would be really nice to retain:

1. Exposure opportunities for collectives.
2. Occasional funding from grants secured by OSC and distributed to projects.
3. Quadratic funding helped drive people to make even small donations they might otherwise not because they didn't feel their dollar/five dollars would make a difference.

Things that were problematic to avoid:

1. FundOSS funding participation doesn't roll into OpenCollective funding participation.
2. FundOSS contributors don't get updates/communication from the collective.
3. Maintaining the separate FundOSS platform is expensive/inefficient use of OSC resources.
4. Collectives didn't know if or when future FundOSS rounds would be coming.

My proposal/suggestion: Establish a permanent program for distributing funding to OSC collectives via quadratic funding. Rather than operate a separate platform, base the weighting on monthly recurring donors and donations to a project, and set some basic minimum standards of inclusion: Presumably collectives should be pushing code within some threshold of recent activity, maybe set expectations of participating in OSC communications actively or something too.

Then, instead of setting up for a particular donation drive, folks can encourage funding their own collectives and communicating through those collectives, but programs like Gitcoin Grants can occasionally roll through and disburse some amount of funding to support open source software and it gets distributed to active OSC collectives. Basing the weighting on donors with recurring subscriptions will incentivize stable funding, and help drive funding that happens persistently as opposed to just during specific rounds of activity.

Regarding project exposure, I think OSC could/should expand highlighting projects which are participating and in need of support.

[gusaus]

Piggybacking on @ocdtrekkie's great suggestions with some of mine from previous discussions in #opensource and #fundoss.

Maintaining the separate FundOSS platform is expensive/inefficient use of OSC resources.

A separate platform seems expensive/inefficient, but would it be feasible to incorporate all the features into https://github.com/opencollective/opencollective? What if the functionality discussed in this issue was built into the new site for https://www.oscollective.org/? Apparently, a new site is in the works, but I'm not sure how OSC collects and incorporates feedback from their collectives.

FundOSS funding participation doesn't roll into OpenCollective funding participation.

Centralizing activity in #opensource, while at the same time leveraging other Slack (#general, #fundraising, #sustainoss, etc.) and marketing channels (Sustain, Gitcoin, etc.) would help solve this problem. We could work with Gitcoin to incorporate additional knowledge and processes (wherever relevant and appropriate) they've accumulated from running successful rounds over time.

FundOSS contributors don't get updates/communication from the collective. Collectives didn't know if or when future FundOSS rounds would be coming.

Those problems would be addressed by a well-defined process + more engaged community (the latter could be accomplished by enabling a #community-working-group member to complete opencollective/opencollective#1996 with a bounty)

Personally, I'd like to see a combination of official rounds (again, I think we could look at Gitcoin for structure and selection criteria (I 'believe' anyone can opt-in - which seems preferable) + community-organized fundraisers. Again, I think OSC specific fundraisers via https://www.oscollective.org/ would be advantageous - especially if other functionality (like a marketplace/job board and partner program) that helps connect projects to resources were also available.

It seems like FundOSS (as a Fund) could be better utilized by creating 'projects' for rounds or campaigns around specific interest areas, categories, or software types. That may encourage large companies in specific interest areas or foundations with industry-specific grants to fund.

Finally - IF cost and team resources (developer, organizer, marketing, etc) were indeed blockers, could we create a 'project' specifically for platform improvements and other resources we'd need? With a budget, the OSC working group could help the OSC team wherever there's a need.

Would be good to have input from other pilot participants and OSC collectives. Would getting this program back on track be beneficial?

[gusaus]

Maybe there was some discussion on one of the monthly OSC calls, but it doesn't seem like there's been any input from OSC about the future of this program (even though folks occasionally inquire in Slack). Now it looks like https://fundoss.org/ is down. Does that mean OSC has officially shelved the program? If yes, could the community help bring it back as suggested in the past couple comments? #42 (comment) #42 (comment)

[gusaus]

Circling back here after coming across what might be a more advanced platform we could leverage for a revival? Not sure if anyone from OSC has talked with @owocki about gitcoinco/skunkworks#284

Would love to touch base and see if there's something we could leverage and contribute to.

[gusaus]

Following up on my last comment, I finally was able to connect with @owocki after leaving this followup in https://community.supermodular.xyz/ about the platform they've been developing.

we’ve got a working platform up at https://simplegrants.xyz/ but so far do not have a pilot customer / funder for it! we designed it to be well documented and reusable for other purposes too

To which I asked some followup questions:

So based on your experience and previous involvement with the FundOSS pilot: 1) would you recommend rebuilding on the new platform instead of the existing/broken one? 2) do you have a rough idea of the time/cost it would take to replicate/improve the functionality the FundOSS platform offered?; 3) assuming we get buy in from some of the larger groups/collectives in the Open Collective ecosystem, are there potential opportunities to partner/pool resources (talent and funds) with y’all?

After mentioning they'd love to support, I sent a follow up email (as requested) to get his recommendations on next steps.

Haven't heard back so I thought I'd just direct everybody back here since we'll need input from @BenJam @zherring and the other original organizers/partners to gauge interest and potential involvement in a FundOSS revival. If for whatever reason they're not interested/able, would it be possible to for new partners and organizers to take over this Github org and https://opencollective.com/fundoss?

[zherring]

@gusaus appreciate the tag! I'm currently COO/CPO of a startup and a new dad, so my time is pretty restricted at the moment. Cannot contribute many hours but happy to provide input where it makes sense! Excited to hear folks are wanting to contribute to push this work forward!