Search

[dsc]

WFS

The WFS (Wownero Funding System) was released somewhere in June of 2018 - a few months after Wownero was born. I hacked it together in the system's first proposal here. Various other projects forked the software: Firo, Aeon, Masari.

The proposal submission process is modelled after Monero's CCS where:

- Community members submit ideas
- Community members discuss each other's ideas
- Moderators (core team) accepts the idea and moves it into a 'funding required' state (or rejects the idea altogether)

## New software

I spent the past 2 months rewriting the funding system in "modern" Python (asyncio). This new system will get a ton of new features/possibilities (mostly back-end related) but it will also have new web4.5™ looks (for example a nice new markdown editor), etc:

- (almost) javascript free
- Built with Quart web framework
- Sexy CSS via CoreUI (Bootstrap)

This work has been commissioned by 2 other cryptocurrency projects but Wownero will benefit as well as this new system will be forked to support Wownero - and ultimately replacing the current funding system.

[imgMETA]http://forum.wownero.com/custom_avatar/1d6a2e3bce9e82a9f742d1f94c3be45a4f7bf36e.png[/img]

## Improvements possible?

However, while working on all this, I asked myself if we could perhaps improve the
above mentioned 4-year-old proposal workflow, so I came up with 2 new 'core' ideas:

## Idea #1; the freedom to raise funds

ideas/proposals shouldn't be dependent on the acceptance of a moderation team. We
could instead allow anyone (with a WOW SSO account) to create proposal(s) at their own discretion.

This would:

- Free up work for our existing moderator team
- Users can raise funds without having to depend on the (perceived arbitrary) acceptance of a moderation team.
- Users don't need to wait till their proposal is accepted

A downside:

- Since anyone can raise funds, it would put that person in charge of marketing their own submitted proposal(s).

This would effectively turn the funding system into a crowdfunding website (similar to GoFundMe).

## Idea #2; Discourse commenting

Our current WFS has commenting built-in. I personally have some issues with this:

1. From a technical perspective, creating a comment section is hard™/annoying
2. We already have a communication platform; this forum (Discourse)
3. Discourse can do commenting/discussions better

So I will move proposal discussion to this forum.

The new funding system could auto-post topics when new a proposal is created.

## TL;DR

- I'm working on a funding system for 2 other cryptocurrency projects
- it is pretty cool
- I will fork this system for Wownero
- I will change this system such that anyone can create a proposal
- I might even allow people to raise funds in another coin, for example Monero.

## ETA

This new crowd funding system could release in May, maybe later. It depends on how busy I am.

[houndvoyager]

That is really interesting news!

Can't wait to see this in action.

Regarding the content, what do you mean by web 4.0?
Also, we could create a subforum for WFS discussion threads in forum.wownero.com (automatically created with each new WFS proposal maybe?)

-hound

[dsc]

web4.5 was a joke, it means "it will look better than what we currently have" :smiley:

Good idea @ subforum, and yes auto-created with each new WFS proposal.

[houndvoyager]

Guess I'm too gullible ._.

Either way, what's the required JS?

[dsc]

Javascript is used during (but not limited to) the proposal (markdown) editor](https://github.com/Ionaru/easy-markdown-editor) from [the screenshot.

There may be more places where javascript will be used on the website - it depends on what functionality the platform will have.

I will try to keep the usage to a minimum though.

[houndvoyager]

Thanks for the explanation!
Well if you need some funding for hosting or sum, I'd be happy to help

[azy]

I will be sure to request many wow

[plowsof]

Congratulations! Permision-less crowdfunding has many positives and negatives. The freemarket would decide who gets donations and who not, but the 'transition' period would be problematic where donators would 'assume' proposals had been vetted / approved and contribute. Providing a refund address could also be an option (things get messy when organising those kinds of things)

[dsc]

> where donators would 'assume' proposals had been vetted / approved and contribute.

Good point, we'll have to think about this.