Support to a pollinator’s bounty

A proposal to support when an unexpected currency value fluctuation impacted the pay for the delivery of The algorithm of donated dreams.

Tokens Requested
USD: 700 / 3,75 ETH (by Aug 27)


Dear community, you supported me to develop this proposal: see in Alchemy; see in GDocs, which resulted in this experience:

XXXXX See film of what happened in Vimeo (05:21)

XXXXX Moreover, find the algorithm and the donated dreams forever alive here:


I am here asking for your help and guidance, as a sudden change of ETHxUSD value between submission–redemption–now has taken half of my fee (set at 1,300 USD) :crying_cat_face:

The transaction can be followed on the blockchain of course, and here’s the story developed on my side:

Upon redemption, I had already lost about 200 of the 1300USD; I didn’t know that this could be brought to someone’s attention, so I moved the money to my wallet… By the time it made it, I went to sleep and woke up, it was in the 700USD.

It’s now been weeks that I chose to monitor currencies instead of changing what I promised in my delivery or making any other changes, but as my project ends, it’s now clear I’ll end almost at a 50% loss.

I am aware of comitting the mistake of loss aversion (?), and also of not reaching out with my problem to the community.

I’ve also been educated as recently as yesterday on Aaron Perlmutter’s message on mixing funds.

I still don’t get it, but I am here to learn, and I’m doing my best; this time I just got busy making and not knowing there was crucial information I lacked.

If I get these funds, I also commit to deliver an audiovisual and short (2 min max) guide to explain how to avoid these mistakes.


About Proposer:

Jocelyn is the Genesis artist in residence, and contributor to blockchain and DAO projects since 2013.

Successfully hosted and delivered The Musaeum of Unfinished Ideas workshop this spring, and The algorithm of donated dreams this summer.


I’m also in the same boat.

However, my opinion is that if you are asking for ETH, you assume the volatility risk.

If the price went up 2X since the proposal, there would be no complaint. Indeed, the reason why I keep asking for funds in ETH is precisely because I believe in the long term value of ETH, otherwise I would just ask for DAI.

Ohh totally: if I had gained 2x I would’ve been surprised, and silent.

My perspective and quest for help boils down to ignorance, or ‘not knowing what I didn’t know’:

  • I had no idea I could not ask for ETH (I’ve copy-pasted from the ‘original template’)

  • I have no idea how to embrace volatility (maybe I shouldn’t until I understand it?)

  • I had no idea that I should’ve asked for advice when it came to this type of proposal (i.e. one that would supplement my profession’s income)

I’m sort of being pulled a few ways here:

  • On one hand, if the price had doubled in USD value, you would not be bringing this up.

  • On the other hand, you seem (by your own admission), unaware of cryptomarket volatility and the wide price swings that characterize this industry, and I generally believe in giving people the benefit of the doubt.

  • But by your own admission here, you had a chance to switch to fiat for small 200 USD “loss” (keep in mind that this is a loss in USD value, not a “loss” in ETH value) and you chose not to, and this is the most important point to me. Alternatively you could’ve just returned the ETH to the DAO immediately and stated outright that you can’t take a loss on this as it’s income for you. It seems to me that there were solutions available in the moment that you chose to ignore, and that has a big impact in my reasoning.

I have a very hard time believing this. In my opinion, the interface gives enough clues (multiple currencies on the left hand side, multiple currency payment options in the proposal submission form) that anyone asking for payment should be able to figure this out. You’ve also used the interface in the past, and have been a member of the GenDAO for a while now; I just have trouble really believing the “I didn’t know” narrative that’s being presented here (not only in relation to asking for other currencies, but also in finding alternative solutions, or even being generally unaware of volatility).

As it stands if you proposed for additional funds I’d probably vote no. But the only way to do this is to submit a proposal and see what happens.

1 Like

Hey Pat! Thanks for the reply!

Your point and your experience is so visible from where I am, and I understand how the points you have a hard time believing are basic and simple, however I promise they are not to me and to my use of this experiment.
I am reading your reasoning and still trying to put it in other words, because they sound “borrowed” in my mind.

It is my understanding that we are in a sort of experiment–game, and thus we play with different facets. In this universe, I’ve been aiming to understand new human interactions, art forms, forms of income… what I don’t understand keeps being a blank, and the more I enter the other topics (because there is space for that and that’s amazing), the more distanced I feel to what I don’t comprehend… but being in an experiment, all is valid.

Beyond trying to make an example out of this, I am trying to get through this one proposal, see what can be done if I reach out… Part of the experiment too!
If my proposal is in any way taking away from others’ income or experience, then I would back down… that’s my profile : P

1 Like



Like with Eric, I was in the same boat. It really sucks.
But I think we could make two lemons out of this lemonade… no, wait
I think that 1. we should have instructional material about this issue (and custody overall) beyond “try at your own risk” and 2. we seriously need some ETH x Stablecoin management policy/mechanism.
So maybe, if @jossbot is willing, she could be part of either initiatives and ask for a bonus proportional with her disarbitrage. I see a win-win-win there.

Some good time ago I was planning to host a workshop about that, which would also output a convivial documentation. So maybe this is a good time to revisit that

1 Like

(1) At the very least, we should state/formalize that it is at the proposer’s risk. Since we haven’t outright stated a policy around this, it leads to quite a bit of ambiguity.

(2) @alexz when Kyberswap/Uniswap integration? We need to be able to swap coins / rebalance more easily with the DAO. Or a Melon integration would work as well to my knowledge.

1 Like

I’m totally in!
It would be lovely if we create around “propose at your own risk”, since “try at your own risk” to me is about bugs and digital safety.

Thanks for jumping into my perspective. I find it hard to say “I made a mistake I didn’t know I was making” without understanding what I can do to grow something back.

@papa_raw Now others might be able to know what to do practically with the info you correctly say we are (and have been) exposed to.

What’s a good next step?

1 Like

Some late comments :smiley_cat:

  1. Autonomy - Code rules… The value of a DAO is that its rules are both descriptive and performative. Changing the consequences of an operation because someone didn’t get it isn’t an option.

It’s comforting to see that things work as expected and that there’s no shortcut nor trick to trump that.

  1. Decentralization - Social rules… A DAO is an instrument in the hands of a collective. More specifically wrt Genesis DAO, “an independent, global community of people working together to build and promote Decentralized Autonomous Organizations”. Community is the last resort instance.

It’s exciting to see that it works this way, that there is a way to make an appeal to the community and to be heard.

  1. Caring - Generosity rules… There’s little leeway regarding a possible fix of Joss’s issue within the limits of the encoded system. What was proposed was delivered and rewarded. Fulfilling Joss’s request requires to a social tradeoff and some creativity. Making the system better, so that there’s less chances that someone else faces the same problem in the future, deserves a reward. Suggesting that the reward covers the previous loss is a social hack. From an economics standpoint, it’s pointless (Joss would have to work more for the same amount she was originally expecting, the community would have to pay more than what they would pay for the fix only). From a social standpoint, it’s creative, relevant, beneficial to all parties, to the extent that all parties have more at stake here than a few ETH in GenDAO’s treasury.

It’s soothing to see that rules don’t work in an abstract vacuum, that they are constantly triggering human response, including emotional and ethical responses

  1. Donated dreams - Imagination rules… (Disclosure: I gave my dream and my vote to Joss’s proposal) The original proposal to Genesis DAO members was to collect and process dreams. Wait a second. How does that help to “build and promote DAOs”? How one should assess the merit of such a proposal? The metrics for success: collecting 20 dreams, narrating the experience, an (not so)-AI driven story… This is so foreign to economic computations, to crypto-incentives in the usual sense of it, and even to collective practices around project building and knowledge sharing. Truth is, there’s no way to give an adequate reward to that. It’s worth nothing, it’s worth everything. I donated my dream to someone through something, and something else came out of it through someone. I still don’t know why nor how these pieces were put together… :dizzy_face:

It’s exhilarating to see that such an experience can result from a DAO, an experience whose most substance remains restive, edgy, out-of-bounds.

One last thing:

What’s a good next step?

Make your proposal, @jossbot!!


I am so moved by your message, thank you.
There is plenty of space to build, to believe each other, and to care. I am here to do all those things!
I decided to place my proposal inside another one with @parrachia , so we deliver the fix through the “How to avoid getting rekt“ workshop.
I am so happy to explore a kinesthetic learning fix :grimacing::alien:


Maybe you can put up a proposal asking part of the loss to be covered?

I am confident that a lot of people will understand your position & support it. We’re still in the very early days of DAO platforms, hence this issue.

My 2 cents as a crypto analyst

Requesting 100% ETH as a reward is like asking 100% of your salary in equity: most of the time it makes no sense. Even if you do want to invest in ETH, you will want to do that at the right time (get into your position) and cash out at the right time (get out of your position). When you get rewarded in ETH, this payment may come at the worst time (just before a price drop). When you want to cash out at the right time, you need the necessary finance to keep that strategy until that moment comes, which may not be possible for everyone.

Asking ‘only’ part of your payment in ETH is better. Although for the sake of simplicity & risk avoidance I much prefer treating investment separately from income in order to have more control: with a thought out strategy & higher chances to succeed.

Note: this is an issue for any work rewarded in non-stable-coin crypto, that’s not a DAO specific issue.