AIP-387: GWG x UMA On-Chain Grants




The Governance Working Group and its Stewards play a pivotal role in enhancing ApeCoinDAO’s governance processes. Their responsibilities include proposal development for ecosystem improvements and growth, fostering external collaborations (such as with UMA), and overseeing the drafting, implementation, and execution of operational budgets for ApeCoinDAO.

UMA’s optimistic oracle secures bridges, prediction markets, and financial contracts with a TVS of over $500 million. oSnap has been successfully adopted by CoW DAO, Across, Connext, ShapeShift, and Lossless Protocol, securing over $250 million in on-chain treasuries and attesting to its reliability and effectiveness.

Collaborative unit includes:


ALL CITY is an ApeCoinDAO Governance Working Group Steward who serves as a key strategist with a proven history authoring successful AIP proposals, GWG initiatives, and DAO-wide campaigns. His primary focusses include identifying potential contributors who can bring value to the ApeCoin ecosystem, and increasing voter turnout.


BigBull is a newly elected ApeCoinDAO Governance Working Group Steward bringing an economics degree with postgraduate studies and over 25 years of business experience and strategic advisory at Fortune 500, and listed private companies. Since becoming a regular contributor at the DAO, he has written a successful AIP proposal, been elected to two key roles within the ecosystem, and pledged to increase the amount of ApeCoinDAO voting delegations to as many as 50 in 2024.


0xAmplify is a longstanding contributor to ApeCoinDAO who has served as a Governance, and WG0 Steward and remains committed to the DAO for the foreseeable future who the GWG may choose to use as a consultant on the program.

Alex Gaines

Alex is an engineer at UMA. He is a core contributor to the creation of oSnap and the partnership with Snapshot. Along with a significant focus on helping onboard DAOs to oSnap, he has worked with insurance and prediction markets to utilize the full potential of UMA and an optimistic oracle.

Lee Poettcker

Lee is an Integrations Engineer with strong technical and communication skills. He supports DAOs in their onboarding and continued use of oSnap. He has experience writing DAO tooling smart contracts for Hats Protocol and has competed at and won prizes in 4 ETHGlobal hackathons.

Manny Narang

Manny is the Head of Sales at UMA, with a specialized focus on DAO governance and decentralized finance solutions. His extensive experience in sales and business development within the tech sector has been pivotal in propelling UMA’s market presence, especially in the niche of DAO governance.

Copy of Copy of Untitled Design

This no-cost proposal signifies a strategic partnership between ApeCoinDAOs Governance Working Group (GWG) and UMA, aiming to launch an innovative on-chain grants program utilizing their Optimistic Snapshot Execution (oSnap) protocol; an optimistic governance tool that will represent a leap towards true decentralized decision-making and a strategic administrative overhead reduction.

The program will be designed to support proposals and community-tailored proposals below 8,500 APE targeting areas that include, but not limited to, cross-community grant programs, in-person events, intellectual property propagation, professional service provider costs for ApeCoin-funded ventures and initiatives, educational services, app and layer-two solution developers, and seed funding for early ideas.

No additional costs are tied to the implementation of UMA’s oSnap protocol, or the development and management of the program, to be completed by the Governance Working Group.

Total allocation of APE designated for grant recipients who participate in this program to be determined in an upcoming proposal.

Click on the arrow to see more

As you scroll through the document for details on corresponding bullet points.

Click for more information about UMA and oSnap

UMA Twitter
UMA Website
UMA oSnap Overview

Copy of GOVERNANCE copy

Copy of Copy of Untitled Design


1. Decentralized Transparency

Transitioning to on-chain grants represents a significant stride towards an actual decentralized process; fostering a more inclusive, transparent, and traceable record-keeping system.

2. Reduced Administration Costs

By leveraging UMAs oSnap protocol we can initiate the process of reducing dependence on human involvement in various aspects of the grant process, and reduce monthly overhead.

3. Pathway Toward an On-Chain Treasury

By tapping into a dedicated on-chain grants pool, we can inspire the community to reconsider the locations where ApeCoinDAO stores the majority of its treasury. This collective effort aims to foster a more diversified and resilient financial future.

4. Faster Grant Distribution

The program ensures prompt access to grant funding once voting concludes, eliminating inherent delays in the traditional AIP process. This assurance ensures that approved projects receive timely support.

5. Expanded Grant Accessibility

By providing more accessible grant funding compared to average AIP requests, the program aims to broaden its reach to a wider audience and increase the number of funding requests under 8500 APE. This initiative opens up new doors for community members and facilitates more onboarding into ApeCoinDAO.

6. Focused Grant Categories

Recognizing the current lack of emphasis on specific grant categories, this proposal seeks to identify and channel community efforts towards key areas. By encouraging increased contributions that target the sectors ApeCoinDAO needs most, the program ensures a more focused and impactful allocation of resources.

In summary, the transition to on-chain grants is a strategic move leveraging blockchain advantages to enhance transparency, efficiency, and decentralization in the ApeCoinDAO funding distribution process with an overarching goal to reduce administration overhead.

Copy of Copy of Untitled Design


Cross-Community Grants

Cross-Community Grants: Grant opportunities offered to Web3 communities that have not yet engaged with ApeCoin or the ApeCoinDAO AIP voting process.

Intellectual Property Propagation

Intellectual Property Propagation: Advancing opportunities for intellectual property (IP) focused grants.

Optimistic Snapshot Execution (oSnap)

oSnap: Developed by UMA, oSnap enables the on-chain execution of off-chain Snapshot votes, streamlining the governance processes of DAOs.

Optimistic Governance

Optimistic Governance: This method allows anyone to submit transactions to implement a proposal. If no dispute arises during a specified window, transactions are executed on-chain, fostering an optimistic approach to governance.

On-chain Execution

On-chain Execution: The process of implementing off-chain voting results directly on the blockchain. In ApeCoinDAOs case, utilizing Snapshot (off-chain) to trigger the release of funds on the blockchain.

Optimistic Oracle

Optimistic Oracle: A decentralized on-chain oracle for resolving flexible data requests. UMA’s optimistic oracle can handle natural language questions, like whether a set of transactions were approved on Snapshot and match what was described in the Snapshot vote.

Off-chain Votes

Off-chain Votes: Voting activities conducted outside of the blockchain, like Snapshot.

Copy of Copy of Untitled Design


A dedicated website, webpage, Discord or Discourse forum channels, or any combination of those four platforms will be set up for the program to serve as centralized hubs for discussion and program submissions. Concurrently, a separate Snapshot Space will be established, distinct from the existing ApeCoinDAO page. Furthermore, the Governance Working Group will oversee a Gnosis wallet to ensure secure and transparent oversight of all financial transactions related to the program.

Here is the program’s anticipated flow…

1. Proposal Submission

Applicants submit their grant proposals.

2. Submission Evaluation

The Governance Working Group assess the proposals to decide whether they should follow the current AIP process or go straight-to-vote on the program’s dedicated Snapshot Space.

Additional initiative partners, potentially including other Working Group Stewards, service providers, active ApeCoinDAO community members or brand collaborators may be invited to participate on proposal assessments and other aspects of the program.

3. Snapshot Creation and Voting

The Governance Working Group will set up and oversee a separate Snapshot Space created for this program where each proposal will be voted on.

Once ready, voting cycles will commence and operate similarly to standard ApeCoinDAO AIP proposals, although cadence and the duration that proposals will remain open for voting may differ.

4. Dispute Window and Resolution

After transactions are proposed for execution, they enter a standard UMA dispute window for three days utilizing their Optimistic Oracle, where disputes on the proposed transaction can be be made by the community, and successful disputers are rewarded.

Common reasons for these disputes would be proposals which have slipped through the initial screening process which break any of the program rules or have been miscatorgized; where for us, could mean that the initiative should have been sent through the standard AIP process.

5. Post-Vote Execution and Reporting

After a successful vote, any address has the option to post a bond (configurable, with 2 WETH recommended) and suggest the on-chain execution of transactions from the Snapshot proposal page. UMA’s bot streamlines this process by automatically sending the transaction, posting the bond, and covering all associated gas fees.

The program will also have implementation reporting requirements and non-monetary resources available to project founders aimed at increasing the success rate of their ideas.

Copy of Copy of Untitled Design


The Governance Working Group will finalize the program structure after successful completion of the AIP process, paying close attention on improving the efficiency and transparency of our current system.

The implementation of UMA’s oSnap protocol can be deployed within hours, and program funding will be sent to a Gnosis Safe under the supervision of the GWG.

To ensure the establishment of a well-organized program, including a community feedback period, the entire process may take upwards of six-eight weeks from the date of fund receipt to rollout the initiative.

Copy of Copy of Untitled Design


There is no cost to implement this proposal.



Hey @AllCityBAYC,

It’s exciting to see the collaboration between GWG and outsourcing companies and the proactive approach.

I appreciate the thoroughness of the proposal, especially the clear steps to implement. FINALLY WE START to use APE as must ask token for funding and not USD.

I have a few questions and points for clarification with “GWG Evaluation” phase:

  1. Could you elaborate on the criteria that the GWG will use to assess grant proposals?

  2. Does this phase include legal review? is it with APE foundation?

  3. I suggest to have a transparent list of binary conditions like you did with below 8,500 APE proposal, of which AIP is "straight-to-vote, the process will become much more automate. The transparent list can be done in 1 week by the foundation, and can be change by vote (I suggest to set a quick voting mechanism for that task, to add/remove binary conditions).

  4. Timeframe is missing, what will be the time to decide whether a proposal should follow the current AIP process orgo straight-to-vote?

Lastly, how will the GWG ensure transparent oversight of the program’s financial transactions through the Gnosis wallet? Part of foundation reports?

Overall, the proposal is well-articulated, and the strategic move toward on-chain grants aligns with the broader trend towards decentralized decision-making.

-Mr. Hype :fire:


Hi MisterHype,

Thank you for your suggestions and positive feedback. Also, Happy New Year and all the best to you and your loved ones in 2024.

Please see below…

  • There are several nuances on the program side of this proposal left open-ended. Primarily to ensure flexibility during the finalization process. I also envision the community to play an important part of the development process, and have accounted for a feedback period, as shown in the Steps to Implement & Timeline section.
  • It is important to recognize that the Governance Working Group are grant recipients who operate autonomously on behalf of the community, and do not represent the Foundation. That being said, the GWG takes risk seriously and the program will never look to supersede any preexisting legal standards, only compliment them.
  • There would be no other way.
  • As mentioned, several nuances on the program side of this proposal have intentionally been left open-ended to allow for flexibility during the finalization process.
  • The standard UMA oSnap implementation executes transactions through the oSnap module, distributing funds from a Gnosis Safe under its control. However, for ApeCoinDAO purposes, I propose incorporating our own multisig wallet as a final layer of security which provides us with the capability to reject proposals in emergencies or worst-case scenarios.

Copy of Copy of Untitled Design

All of that being said, in order for this plan to reach its full potential we need voices like MisterHype, so if you’re interested in contributing to some of the development of this program, drop a comment and get involved. The phase that this proposal is in right now here on Discourse is meant for it.

Looking forward to running some polls in the coming days with potential program options and ideas… Tap in.



I love the UMA team. A bunch of big brains that we should be working with honestly. I’ll vote for anything they do. Was a token holder back in 2020 or so, but was always impressed with everyone on the team I spoke to back in the day.


Hey @AllCityBAYC,

Happy New Year!

Appreciate your reply and effort you put to improve the process. As you said below, that’s why I suggested here in the comment, I do think we should use ‘AIP Idea’ as a phase to collect feedback, work together and bring proposals we agree to vote on, to vote&pass.

But I can’t help if the plan is only that way,

Because I don’t believe that way help the process, if we do not agree on what move straight-to-vote or not, we will failed such we did with AIP-01, as the process still has a mandate of straight to vote instead of administration review phase, when in reality ANY AIP we had went to administration review, for example, adding treasury tab to discourse / having min 1 APE to vote.

If we wouldn’t make a binary list, we keep the manual review unclear and not efficient. I do like the approach, consider to think on other ways.

-Mr. Hype :fire:

1 Like

Hey fam!

Evolution is key, so if the pathways shown on this and/or future iterations of this proposal are not deemed appropriate by the community — I can promise that whatever those solutions are, will be the solutions I endorse in full.

I think we may be experiencing a misunderstanding here. By me typing “there would be no other way” was me stating that our thinking aligns, entirely.


1 Like

Hi @AllCityBAYC

I believe it’s a great proposal, love the idea.
I have some questions:

  1. What are the long-term sustainability plans for this program?
  2. Given that the proposal aims to distribute a minimum of 16 grants in the first four months, what is the anticipated distribution rate or strategy for grant allocation beyond this initial period?

Thank you


Hey @AllCityBAYC,

That’s great to hear.

I do think we need include a pre-step in the AIP, to get from APE Foundation approval binary list which the legal team approve which give the ones from this AIP the mandate to flag it “straight-to-vote” which will make everything crystal clear in decision making process.

In addition to that, since we can’t predict the future, adding a voting mechanism to edit that list, meaning, how we add/remove those kind of proposals which we think should go live without administration review, that process must be different than AIP process, and quick (maybe give the mandate to global community committee).

-Mr. Hype :fire:


This program would require to request for a 2nd round of funding as an AIP in the apecoin.eth main snapshot process.

This would require to show that it had positive outcomes for ApeCoin.

Both your questions are similar and as these are not investments but a small grants program it will require funding from AIPs.

There could be ways for it to have a larger ask via an AIP and then get APY from the funds asks via staking or Defi management via Liquidity Pools etc.


Broskiii… Great to link up the other night in Vancouver, and super stoked to see you getting active on the forum.

Also looks like @bigbull covered that reply pretty well, which I appreciate while I’m still away from my desk. Unless you wanted to clarify #2 a little more.

We’re always eager to help :muscle: :muscle:



thank you for the response


it was great meeting you bro, yes I’m stoked being here and getting to learn from all you guys putting in the great work.

My second question related to the frequency of grants distribution after the initial four months period, will it continue to aim to distribute a minimum of 16 grants for the four following months… and so on. If that makes more sense

Thanks for all you do bro, amazing work


Ahhhhhhh… Ok!

Now I understand. And no, not necessarily bound to four months. Ideally, when we do go back up after this initial period, we would lock into one year.

Writing proposals is definitely a balancing act, with the voting community paying close attention to costs. And in-turn, the longer the program duration the bigger the program cost.

A six month period may also be logical, given the GWG budget cycles, but difficult to synch up.

Hope that helps fam!! Ask about anything any time!!!



Big yes! This is the way team :smiley:
Good luck


Maybe we do one for Indian developers with your help?


1 Like

The last time I tried to push this idea not many liked it lol.


Crunching numbers on a few things right now… Stay tuned.



Love the structure and layout of this AIP, really easy to read through and digest, great way to kick off 2024 :+1:

Plus the AIP gets a big yes from me, seems like a solid win-win for the DAO with a positive path forwards for it too after this initial ask is all used up

Nice one!


Love it

If this gets approved, it’s a really easy way for me to promote and onboard new people into the DAO

This seems so much simpler than the full AIP process. For example, one of the colabs I’m working on is with Krause House for a very modest $5k - $10k ask, but the full AIP process is so time consuming and labor intensive, it almost forces the ask to be increased, but we don’t want to. It’s supposed to be a simple and small ask and we’d like to keep it that way. What you’re proposing above would help achieve that.

Same with another colab coming up I’m working on with LinksDAO.

Keeping it simple and straight forward for 2024, seems like a great thing to me :star_struck:

1 Like

Thanks fam! Means a lot…

Worked hard on this, inside and out.

I feel you on this.


1 Like