TEC H2 2025 Strategic Proposal

Introduction

In the second half of 2025, the Token Engineering Commons is rallying around one central idea: if we want to change the story of crypto, we must remain a constant, steady voice pointing to those building protocols and tools that make direct, positive impacts on the world. We are shifting the collective spotlight away from financial speculation and mechanism hype toward the real, tangible ways blockchains can support communities, advance public goods, and unlock new forms of civic coordination.

The work in this cycle is grounded in action, and built around four pillars: Storytelling & Advocacy, Grant Program Funding, Sustainability & Infrastructure, and Community Development. Within each of these focus areas, we have several initiatives that we are continuing to scale and develop. Through the TEC Publishing initiative, we will continue publishing stories that matter, writing articles that inspire and educate, and highlighting the builders, researchers, and organizers using token engineering to tackle real problems.

A Virtual Conference pilot will bring together the brightest minds across key verticals like ReFi, DeSci, and Localism to align on what’s needed and what’s next as we coordinate around real-world impact. We will continue to host powerful online events and Research Hub sessions that surface applied insights and strengthen the knowledge base for impactful use-cases.

Our Grants Program is being upgraded, and we are launching a new round focused entirely on real-world impact, with special support for early stage projects at the ideation and prototype phase. We are improving the infrastructure for applications, reviews, and milestone tracking to make the process smoother, more transparent, and more accountable.

Additionally, we are refining our token infrastructure, testing new use cases, raising funds to support our long-term sustainability, and rebuilding community pathways and engagement so that the TEC becomes easier to find, easier to join, and harder to ignore.

The TEC is one of the few organizations actively guiding blockchain toward meaningful, community-driven impact. In a space often clouded by speculation and short-term gains, our work helps rebuild trust, center human needs, and demonstrate that this technology can serve as public infrastructure, and not just financial instruments.

We believe blockchains can empower collective agency, enable more responsive governance, and support coordination that begins locally and provides a roadmap for others to follow. As the narrative around crypto evolves and the world asks what this technology is truly for, the TEC is stepping forward with purpose and clarity as we support and guide the projects in this space that will ultimately change the narrative of crypto.

Review of H1 2025 Progress

In the first half of 2025, the TEC Coordination Team made strong progress across four strategic objectives, launching a TEC Publication, a Research Hub, and executing on the multi-round Grant Program supporting TE projects in the OP Superchain Ecosystem. We also upgraded our infrastructure with a new ABC page, Aragon Governance interface, and integrated TQF into the Gitcoin calculator.

We are very proud of our progress in H1, and are looking to build on our success within H2. For more details about our efforts in H1, please visit our forum thread here: TEC H1 2025 Deliverables Update

Strategic Focus for H2

The Token Engineering Commons is organizing its work for the second half of 2025 around four interconnected focus areas:

1. Storytelling, Education & Advocacy - we are dedicated to shifting the narrative of crypto toward one of purpose, impact, and possibility. This focus area exists to make the transformative potential of blockchain not just visible, but deeply relatable and inspiring. By translating complex ideas into accessible stories and educational experiences, we aim to show how blockchain is already driving real outcomes in communities around the world. This is about more than awareness but about helping people see what’s possible, connecting builders across disciplines, and guiding attention toward projects that matter. In a space flooded with hype, this work ensures that the signal of real-world impact cuts through the noise.

2. Grants Program Development - focused on turning bold ideas into tested, high-impact solutions by strengthening TEC’s core funding mechanism and support network. This focus area exists to bridge the gap between theory and application by supporting projects that take the principles of token engineering and bring them to life in the real world. By prioritizing early-stage innovation and offering milestone-based funding, mentorship, and infrastructure, we aim to give builders the support they need to bring the most promising ideas to life. This is not just about distributing funds, but about cultivating legitimacy, and creating a clear, transparent path from concept to community impact.

3. Sustainability & Infrastructure - focused on building the long-term backbone that makes everything else possible. This focus area ensures that TEC remains resilient, well-resourced, and capable of evolving with the needs of our mission. It’s where we strengthen the financial, technical, and organizational infrastructure that allow us to operate with independence, clarity, and integrity.

4. Community Development & Visibility - focused on making the TEC discoverable, approachable, and easy to engage with. This focus area is about creating clear, welcoming pathways for contributors, collaborators, and tokenholders to understand who we are, what we’re building, and how they can get involved.

H2 Objectives & Initiatives

To bring our vision to life in the second half of 2025, the Token Engineering Commons is advancing a set of carefully designed initiatives that span across our four strategic focus areas. Each initiative is a deliberate step toward reshaping the dialogue around crypto toward meaningful conversations and work that empowers builders and supports communities where innovation can make a lasting difference. These initiatives are not isolated projects, but interlocking components of a broader organizational strategy.

1. Storytelling, Education & Advocacy

Publishing Initiative

We will continue building on our public-facing editorial platform that showcases stories, insights, and research at the intersection of blockchain and real-world impact. Through original articles, interviews, and guest publications, this initiative aims to make complex topics in token engineering accessible and inspiring. It highlights the work of builders, researchers, and organizers who are using crypto tools for real-world coordination and impact.

Publication Link: https://paragraph.com/@tecommons

KR: Publish 6 articles that attract 100+ reads each and receive positive feedback from community members.

Newsletter

We will continue with our Newsletter Publication, The Rollup Report that curates important TEC updates, developments in Layer 2 ecosystems, and highlights from across verticals like ReFi, Localism, and DeSci. The newsletter is designed to keep the TEC community informed, connected, and inspired. It serves as a gateway for both newcomers and existing members to stay engaged with our evolving work and the broader movement for real-world blockchain applications.

Newsletter Homepage: https://tec-rollup-report.beehiiv.com/

KR: Release 6 newsletters with an average open rate of 35% and reaching a total of 75+ subscribers by end of cycle.

Digital Events

These online gatherings are designed to surface and showcase meaningful Web3 research and real-world applications. Digital Events are split into two tracks:

  • TEC Talks, which often feature speakers and projects from verticals like Localism and ReFi, and focus on thematic community storytelling.

  • Research Hub, which spotlights applied academic and technical research in Web3, providing a venue for sharing knowledge that pushes the field forward.

These events foster community learning, bring visibility to important ideas, and build bridges between theory and practice.

Digital Event Recordings: https://www.youtube.com/@TokenEngineeringCommons/videos

KR1: Host 5 TEC Talks with 50+ attendees and follow-up content that reaches 500+ viewers through recordings, recaps, or derivative media.

KR2: Produce 3 high-quality Research Hub events with 50+ attendees each and follow-up content that reaches 500+ viewers through recordings, recaps, or derivative media.

Virtual Conference (Pilot)

The Virtual Conference is a new initiative that will serve as an experimental format for community coordination and thought leadership. In H2, TEC will run a pilot version of a Virtual Conference focused on one key vertical (e.g., ReFi, DeSci, or Localism). The initiative includes:

  • Hosting monthly coordination calls with top leaders from the chosen vertical that will follow a highly organized agenda.

  • Each call will facilitate a collaborative engagement process to surface shared challenges, opportunities, and needs from each of the projects and offer pathways to work together to overcome obstacles that allow the verticals to succeed.

  • After 6 months, these meetings will lead to a mini-conference that brings these voices together in a public, participatory format. Each member will serve on an opening panel, host their own talks based on their experience within the program, and will have an open offering for potential speakers.

The goal is to model what purposeful, coordinated movement-building in Web3 can look like starting with focused, vertical-specific gatherings. This initiative will also serve as the first test in revenue generation for the TEC through ticket sales.

KR: Pilot one Virtual Conference MVP with 50+ signups, at least 25 attendees and 10 qualitative feedback responses informing future iterations.

TEC Library Development

The TEC Library is a growing knowledge hub of curated resources on token engineering, public goods, coordination, and crypto economics. In H2, we will continue to add to the library, and include content from the community, and organize it for easy discovery and learning. The library supports onboarding, education, and cross-pollination across Web3 verticals.

KR: Add 50 tagged, curated resources to the TEC Library (incl. 5 community-sourced)


2. Grants Program Development

Real-World Impact (RWI) Grant Round

This new round of TEC’s Grants Program centers entirely on real-world impact. The goal is to fund projects that apply token engineering principles to solve real problems through working governance, incentive, or coordination mechanisms. The round will prioritize early-stage projects in the 0-to-1 development (ideation and prototyping stage) that need support to become viable implementations.

This initiative builds on the TEC’s iterative strategy for our Grant Program, and will incorporate a multi-round support infrastructure. The first round will be a 10k QF round that will surface new ideas, and early-stage projects that hold promising potential to create solutions for real-world communities. Grantees who execute on their established milestones, and show substantial growth and interest in their projects after their initial QF funding, will have a chance to participate in a subsequent Retro-Round for a larger pool of funding.

The Grant Program will allow for the TEC to become a hub for early-stage RWI projects that can utilize our network and infrastructure to continue building their vision, and participate in a Grant Program that allows them to mature at a realistic pace and connect them to larger grant programs in the process.

Grant Round Sponsors

The TEC will seek to find consistent and recurring funding for the Grant-Program moving forward by partnering with aligned organizations such as DAOs, Foundations, and Validators to expand the impact of the program, increase capital efficiency, and help position TEC as a trusted steward of meaningful funding initiatives.

KR1: Finalize and publish a detailed RWI Grants Program Framework (open-source & shareable)
KR2: Secure 50%+ of grant funds via external partner or sponsor for the QF Round.
KR3: Develop a Support Infrastructure for Grantees.


3. Sustainability & Infrastructure

Fundraising and Grant Applications

This initiative aims to bring in external funding to support TEC’s operations and community programs. The goal is to secure external grants and sponsorships, ensuring TEC can remain independent, operationally resilient, and strategically aligned. Applications will target aligned public goods funds, ecosystem grants (e.g., Optimism, Arbitrum, Ethereum Foundation), and philanthropic entities.

KR: Raise $50K+ in funds (via grants)

Token Infrastructure Maintenance

TEC is committed to maintaining and improving the technical infrastructure that supports its native $TEC token. The conversation about what direction to take with the current $TEC markets is still ongoing and we will continue to engage token-holders on the best course of action.

KR: Consolidate our current liquidity pairs away from TEC/OP, and TEC/GIV to TEC/ETH on Velodrome.

Token Utility Experimentation

TEC will test at least one new token utility use case with measurable user interaction. The first use case will likely be tied to the Grants Program (e.g., token-gated proposal review or community signal voting). The goal is to prototype meaningful ways for the $TEC token to support governance, reputation, or value alignment beyond speculation.

KR: Test and document one token utility use case with measurable user interaction (Grants Program)

Governance Infrastructure

The TEC finalized its implementation of its Aragon Governance interface during H1. This initiative is a lightweight but essential initiative focused on maintaining the overall health of TEC’s governance systems. It includes regular communication with tokenholders to ensure transparency and continued engagement, as well as routine check-ins and upkeep of our governance infrastructure.

When necessary, minimal updates will be made to proposals, voting tools, or related processes to keep everything running smoothly. The goal is to ensure that TEC’s decision-making remains functional, legitimate, and responsive even during periods of lower activity or participation.

KR: Maintain governance infrastructure (1 check-in, tokenholder communication)


4. Community Development & Visibility

Website Initiative

This initiative seeks to update the Token Engineering Commons website, with a focus on clarity, navigation, and usability. The new site will include:

  • A clear “What is TEC?” explainer section

  • Live links to resources, opportunities, and documentation

  • Better storytelling about TEC’s mission and work

This initiative ensures that TEC is easy to find, understand, and explore for newcomers, collaborators, and tokenholders alike.

KR: Make improvements on TEC website with updated content, explainer section, and live links.

Onboarding Initiative

This initiative is a practical, well-designed resource to help new community members understand how TEC works and how they can get involved. The kit will include:

  • Clear pathways to engage

  • Key links to active initiatives

  • Calls to action for contributors, funders, and partners.

The goal is to remove ambiguity and help people plug into TEC’s work with confidence and clarity as we seek support from both newcomers and mission aligned organizations.

KR: Publish TEC Onboarding Kit with key links and calls to action

Social Media Initiative

The TEC will continue developing a cross-platform social media presence and build on the success we had in H1 with:

  • Defined audience segmentation, content types, posting cadence, and tone of voice.

  • A semi-automated publishing workflow that reuses content from the newsletter, events, and library to inform different audience segments.

  • Metrics to evaluate reach and engagement.

The strategy aims to increase TEC’s visibility and reinforce its position as a trusted voice in the regenerative crypto space.

KR1: Continue developing a sustainable, audience-informed social media strategy — including content types, cadence, voice, and formats to consolidate TEC’s presence across platforms.

KR2: Develop and document a semi-automated content workflow that reuses publishing/newsletter/library/events content for communications (e.g. Notion > scheduling tool)

Financial Request

Amount Requested: ~58.2k DAI

This proposal requests funding to cover the operational needs of the TEC Coordination Team for the period July to December 2025.

The proposed budget supports core operations, including:

  • Contributor compensation for full-time and part-time staff members
  • Incentives and bounties to recognize contributions tied to performance or key milestones
  • Tools and services required for daily coordination work
  • Miscellaneous expenses to account for unexpected operational costs

The budget is based on actual expenditures and projections from H1 2025.

Category Monthly (DAI) H2 Total (DAI)
Staffing (2 FT, 1 PT) 8,000 = ~390h/work 48,000 = 2,340h/work
Incentives & Bounties 1,200 7,200
Tools 100 600
Misc. 400 2,400
Total 9,700 58,200

​​We propose covering this budget through a combination of existing TEC assets and a request to the TEC Common Pool:

1. Multisig-held Funds:

We are requesting access to all the funds currently held in the TECAN, TEC GG and LASERTAG multisigs. Although these funds are in multisig wallets, they belong to the Commons and were largely secured via grants or initiatives that have been sunsetted. As such, we will follow the established governance process, with one difference:

  • A TAO vote will serve as a signaling vote to the approval of this request.
  • Upon approval, we will coordinate with multisig signers to access the funds and report the process in the forum.

2. OP-Retro-PGF-6 Grant Streaming Funds:

We will also consider the incoming funds earned through the OP-Retro-PGF-6 grant, which is currently being streamed starting this month through October. These funds are being streamed to an EOA controlled by the team, so this proposal would serve to ratify access over those funds

3. TEC Common Pool

We also request that the remainder of the needed funds be sourced from the TEC Common Pool, through the standard TAO proposal process.

  • A single TAO vote will be submitted for the proportional amount required from the Common Pool.
  • If approved, this same vote will serve as the signal to proceed with multisig and OP grant funds disbursement as well.

This proposal is focused exclusively on covering operational costs for the Coordination Team. Funding for other TEC initiatives—such as the Grants Program—will be submitted as separate proposals as needed.

The following tables provide a detailed breakdown of the funding request by source. Each table outlines the specific request, helping clarify how the overall budget will be gathered across sources.

TECAN Multisig Request

Token Chain Balance (Token) Balance (USD) Price Request in Tokens Request in USD Request in %
rETH OP 3.54 11,709.18 3,310.39 3.54 11,709.18 100.00%
USDGLO ARB 405.28 405.28 1.00 405.28 405.28 100.00%
USDGLO OP 38.35 38.35 1.00 38.35 38.35 100.00%
USDC OP 26.28 26.28 1.00 26.28 26.28 100.00%
ETH ARB 0.005 14.81 2,981.63 0.005 14.81 100.00%
All Other OP/ARB/POL - 30.35 - ALL 30.35 100.00%
Total 12,224.24

TEC GG Multisig Request

Token Chain Balance (Token) Balance (USD) Price Request in Tokens Request in USD Request in %
USDC ARB 8,935.94 8,934.66 1.00 8,935.94 8,934.66 100.00%
ARB ARB 123.16 47.69 0.39 123.16 47.69 100.00%
ETH ARB 0.01 40.85 2,981.63 0.01 40.85 100.00%
USDGLO ARB 18.10 18.10 1.00 18.10 18.10 100.00%
Total 9,041.31

LASERTAG Multisig Request

Token Chain Balance (Token) Balance (USD) Price Request in Tokens Request in USD Request in %
ALL OP/POL/GNO - 278.04 - ALL 278.04 100.00%
Total 278.04

OP RPGF6 Funds

Token Chain Balance (Token) Balance (USD) Price Request in Tokens Request in USD Request in %
OP OP 15,999.00 11,199.30 0.70 15,999.00 11,199.30 100.00%
Total 11,199.30

Common Pool Request

Token Chain Balance (Token) Balance (USD) Price Request in Tokens Request in USD Request in %
DAI OP 154,214.17 154,185.95 1.00 25,461.77 25,457.11 16.51%
TEC OP 1,587.03 261.22 0.16 1,587.03 261.22 100.00%
Total 25,457.11

Note on Table Values: The specific token amounts and USD equivalents listed in the tables above reflect current market prices at the time of drafting. As token prices may fluctuate during the proposal review and voting period, the actual values will be adjusted accordingly at the time of execution. However, the total requested amount in USD terms (58,200) will remain unchanged.

Conclusion

The first half of this year was about laying foundations. Now, we’re ready to build on that momentum and take this work to the next level. What we’ve outlined here is more than a plan. It’s a commitment to keep showing up—for the stories that matter, for the builders, and for the communities already proving what’s possible—and for the ones still waiting to see how this technology can make their lives better.

We’d be honored to have your support, in whatever form that takes. Whether through a supportive vote, collaboration, or simply continuing to believe in this work, it all makes a difference.

We’re grateful to be on this path—and excited for what comes next.

Mon, Nate and Bear

TEC Coordination Team

2 Likes

I’d be really looking forward to a community call to discuss this proposal before it is executed!

I think some aspects are valuable, but the budget seems off overall.

I applaud the efforts on narrowing down the number of multisigs by sourcing funds across the old multisigs.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Rex.

Feel free to add any comments or questions directly on the post—that’s exactly what the advice process is meant for. It gives everyone a chance to engage in their own time, without leaving out people who might not be able to make a live call.

That’s why we don’t feel a community call is needed at this point. That said, the Coordination Team calls are always open if you ever want to join and chat things through.

I call for the dissolution of the $TEC token, and a graceful end of life to our token economy. I call for those who have put their time, money to come forward and express their opinions.

I will post a counterproposal on this matter by end of week on how that could look like, which will require either a community call, or at least wider outreach to key stakeholders for comment on the matter.

Given recent low engagement in forums, and saturation of posts from the Coordination Team in the last week, I can understand that key stakeholders have not yet been able to keep up with the conversation.

For that reason, I believe your proposal, @bear100, has not yet received sufficient active community support to be followed through with.

I ask other stakeholders for comment here, so that we can have a wider discussion on the future of the TEC.

Dear @bear100 and TEC Coordination Team,

Thank you for the thorough H2 2025 Strategic Proposal. Appreciate the direction TEC is taking with its four focus areas and it’s clear there’s a strong commitment to maintain our purpose-driven impact. That said, I’d like to suggest that under Storytelling, Education & Advocacy, we place greater emphasis on high-leverage, accessible digital marketing channels like TikTok and other short-form content platforms, in addition to our presence on X, where there are new user demographics to be potentially on-boarded to $TEC. With tools like Leonardo.ai, for example, it’s easier than ever to create compelling, on-brand audiovisual narratives that can resonate with broader audiences, especially those not yet plugged into the token engineering or crypto worlds.

While YouTube discussion panels and Newsletters do have value, especially for deeper engagement and knowledge management, they may not be the most cost-effective outreach tools in a resource-constrained environment. I’d suggest treating them as nice-to-haves, if there is a need for further slimming resources and ambition, rather than core investments unless additional funding becomes available.

Instead, I’d argue that Grants, Fundraising, and User Experience on the TEC platform should core to mission and be prioritized and budgeted accordingly. These areas directly drive TEC near term survival and capacity to support, grow, and retain the TEC community in this current period. Thank you again for the expansive vision, while ensuring that that the execution is lean and impact-driven.

3 Likes

Hey Rex,

You’re absolutely welcome to submit a proposal if that feels like the best path forward to you.

That said, it would’ve been great for us to first understand more clearly where you feel this proposal could be improved, so we could work together on refining it. That’s precisely the purpose of the community advice process.

You mentioned finding some aspects of the proposal valuable (though you didn’t specify which), and noted that the budget seems off, but haven’t elaborated on how. Now you’re shifting focus to the TEC infrastructure discussion, which is definitely related, but not something we’re aiming to resolve within the scope of this proposal.

So, it’s still unclear to us whether your concern is with the overall vision, the initiatives, the budget, the token infrastructure, or why this would merit a separate proposal instead of contributing to improving the one already on the table.

You also mentioned post saturation, but we’ve only shared four posts in the last few days as part of our H1 deliverables, and people (yourself included) are starting to engage with them.

As for engagement more broadly, it’s been a consistent challenge across many TEC initiatives as you probably know. Over the years, not many have taken the time or interest to engage meaningfully in these conversations, whether due to time constraints, priorities, or lack of interest. So it’s definitely good to start seeing that shift now with you, Rex.

Lastly, you’re right that the proposal hasn’t yet received community support, but that’s not what the advice process is for. The advice process is for surfacing feedback and improving the proposal. Community support (or not) gets reflected through the vote, which will happen after the proposal has had enough time for community input, as outlined in our governance framework.

2 Likes

Thanks so much for your comments and engagement, DecentralizeSDG. You bring up some really important points that, in fact, speak directly to some of our underlying intentions.

You’re absolutely right that no matter how valuable our initiatives are, people need to know about them, and for that, we need to keep building a purpose-driven social media strategy that actually reaches people where they are. Content and outreach are a core part of this plan, even if not shown in full detail here. In H1, we began experimenting with YouTube Shorts, Instagram Reels, and a more consistent presence on LinkedIn. In H2, we want to keep building on that, and refining the process by making sure the content we share is high-quality and meaningful, across platforms beyond just X.

Appreciate the tip on Leonardo.ai, as it looks like a great tool, and we’re definitely interested in exploring tools like that to help streamline content workflows and make our content creation both more compelling and efficient.

On your point about priorities: agreed. One of our core goals is to generate synergy across initiatives so that our investments, both in terms of time and resources, amplify one another. A good example of this is the Research Hub: we host an event, publish it on YouTube, create short clips for social reach, expand into written pieces for the publication, which in turn feed the newsletter. Each step builds on the last, driving visibility, engagement, and ultimately strengthening our credibility and network. This kind of attention and narrative-building can directly support fundraising, community growth, and the success of the grants program by positioning the TEC and its grantees in a stronger light.

We also agree that, Grants, Fundraising, and User Experience are essential. But we also see smart, strategic storytelling and education as a key piece in helping those areas thrive.

2 Likes

Hey Bear! I’ve responded on why I think this proposal is misguided as part of your other three posts. The information density in the last week, especially for a small DAO, is being hard to follow.

I don’t think the proposal above is very workable in its current state, which is why I am drafting a counter proposal.

I’m aware of how the process works - but the manner in which this proposal is being carried out anyway (i.e. the rehypothecation of funds without those funds being returned to the common pool) is by definition bypassing the voting rights of the token holders; and hence not a normal proposal :+1:

@rex

Appreciate you taking the time to engage across multiple posts. That said, I’d like to clarify and respond to a few of your points directly.

The posts are actually not difficult to follow. You’ve commented on two of them — and your responses were noted. Your feedback in the Token Infrastructure Report focused on three main concerns:
• Your preference for managing our current liquidity;
• A belief that $TEC lacks demand and utility;
• And a decline in token-holder count.

In the Grant Framework post, your comments boiled down to:
• A view that Quadratic Funding is inefficient;
• That $TEC has little investor appeal;
• And a general skepticism that Token Engineers remain active in the TEC.

These are valid opinions, and we’ve taken them into account. Whether they make it into the final version depends on broader community input, which is what the advice process is for. But let’s not frame this as some overwhelming information storm. It’s a healthy amount of well-organized material for anyone genuinely engaging.

Of course, you’re entitled to submit your own proposal. That’s how governance works. Still, I do wish you would have chosen to collaborate rather than undermine a proposal this team has spent two months developing with transparency and good faith. Your level of involvement in critiquing this proposal has been disproportionate to your involvement in TEC operations more broadly. If you’re frustrated with token price or utility, you’re free to exit the ecosystem like many others have. But if you care about our mission, then your energy would be more helpful if channeled toward constructive contribution.

This is simply incorrect. We cannot move funds from other multisigs unilaterally, and that is why this proposal includes a clear requirement for token-holder ratification, just like our earlier approved proposals which followed the same process. No voting rights are being bypassed. No shortcuts are being taken. The claim that this is not a “normal proposal” doesn’t hold up to scrutiny.

Finally, if your intention is to dissolve the Augmented Bonding Curve or sunset $TEC, I will oppose that with both reason and commitment, because those ideas are not rooted in credible critiques of TEC’s mission, infrastructure, or impact. They are reactionary, not strategic.

If you’d like to talk further my DMs are open. Same with Bear’s, same with Mon’s. We welcome open dialogue. We’re excited about the TEC’s trajectory and hopeful others will meet us with the same spirit of collaboration.

Thanks for the detailed proposal and the effort that went into it.

That said, I want to clearly state why this proposal, as currently written, does not comply with the TEC Community Covenant, and why some of its assumptions are problematic.

The latest version of the Community Covenant is found here: TEC Community Covenant.

:rotating_light: 1. Bypasses Collective Governance on Treasury

This proposal requests full access to funds from TECAN, TEC GG, and Lasertag multisigs without first returning them to the TEC Common Pool. These multisigs were created for scoped, specific mandates—not general operating budget reuse.

Per the Covenant and commons norms, bringing funds back to the pool and requesting funds from the pool are two separate governance steps. Treating them as a bundle undermines tokenholder oversight and violates the principle of scoped, transparent fund management.


:brick: 2. Violates Ostrom’s Collective Choice Principle

The Covenant commits us to meaningful participation. This proposal was dropped alongside three other large pieces of Coordination Team content, with no live community call despite requests. There is no sufficient sign that key stakeholders were consulted beforehand, and the advice process appears rushed and top-down.


:mag: 3. No Monitoring or Sanction Mechanism

The deliverables in this proposal are mostly activity-based (e.g., “publish X posts,” “host Y events”) without impact metrics, cost-effectiveness measures, or accountability mechanisms. That violates core design principles of both commons governance and responsible public goods funding.


:boom: 4. Strategic Drift

Rather than address structural issues—declining token value, shrinking legitimacy, minimal external traction—the proposal expands TEC’s scope further (events, infra, token experiments, editorial, social) with the same limited capacity and budget. This is not a sustainable operating model.