Season 6 Ideas - Established Projects - Gardens đŸŒ±

Ecosystem Campaigns
1

1. Project Name

Gardens :seedling:

2. Project Description

Gardens is a community governance platform that helps people allocate shared resources as effectively as possible. Our platform lets communities govern themselves using best-in-class mechanisms, giving decision-making power to the people closest to the work, while protecting the greater collective from abuse and apathy.

Communities on Gardens include open source projects, pop-up cities, web3 ecosystems, chapter-based orgs, activists, and many other public goods providers.

Season 6 headline: Gardens is going public with Streaming Conviction Voting, a new core Superfluid Protocol integration that lets communities fund pools where tokens stream directly to proposal beneficiaries based on each proposal’s live conviction. After a successful private beta with the GoodBuilders ecosystem and others, Season 6 opens the feature to all communities on Gardens and rewards adoption heavily.

Streaming Conviction Voting is the platinum standard mechanism for low-friction, secure, community-first funding allocation. It can effectively grow ecosystem initiatives ranging from small open source working groups to top-level treasury allocation for massive global ecosystems.

You can see Streaming Conviction Voting live in the GoodBuilders Ecosystem here:
https://app.gardens.fund/gardens/42220/0xfdc5de023a8a1919a37208ea89e2d3fe4d7c7991/0x84ca383b4c254806b30d2d49fd75b4b5adf7b8ae

3. Website

https://app.gardens.fund

4. Project Readiness

Gardens is live in production and has been operating continuously since launch. The platform finished Season 5 with 166 communities, 2,744 unique members, $87,754 TVL, and $235,065 total value allocated through funding pools. Streaming Conviction Voting is in private beta and ready to launch publicly at the start of Season 6.

5. How Does This Project Benefit $SUP Holders?

Season 5 carried forward the momentum from our Season 4 launch and grew the platform’s Superfluid integration across all communities. With Streaming Conviction Voting going public, Season 6 is positioned to deepen Superfluid usage further by tying every funding decision on Gardens to active Superfluid streams.

For Season 6, we plan to build on the Season 4 and 5 reward structures with rewards for:

  • Streaming tokens into funding pools on Gardens via Superfluid

  • One-time transfers of Pure Super Tokens into funding pools

  • Heavily weighted rewards for communities adopting Streaming Conviction Voting pools, where governance conviction drives live streams to proposal beneficiaries

  • Community-level matching: all members of communities where members stream/add funds receive matched rewards, weighted by funds added to pools and governance tokens staked

  • New followers on Farcaster

The Streaming Conviction Voting reward multiplier is the central mechanic of Season 6. Every adopting community translates governance activity into continuous Superfluid streams, growing $SUP utility and Superfluid Protocol TVL together.

6. How Does the Project Use Superfluid?

Communities on Gardens add funds via Superfluid streams to funding pools they set up on the app. Funding pools are allocated using conviction voting and are modularly configurable, with each pool dedicated to a specific community need (grants, operations, events, growth, etc.).

Streaming funds into pools is extremely useful for budgeting across community segments and promotes healthy long-term shared resource allocation.

Streaming Conviction Voting (launching publicly in Season 6) is a new funding pool type where funding streams directly to proposal beneficiaries based on the live conviction each proposal accumulates. It deepens the Superfluid integration from “stream into the pool” to “stream out of the pool based on community signal”, making Superfluid the native settlement layer for governance outcomes on Gardens.

Issue: https://github.com/orgs/1Hive/projects/18?pane=issue&itemId=153933614&issue=1Hive|gardens-v2|801=

Private beta example pool (GoodBuilders Ecosystem):
https://app.gardens.fund/gardens/42220/0xfdc5de023a8a1919a37208ea89e2d3fe4d7c7991/0x84ca383b4c254806b30d2d49fd75b4b5adf7b8ae

Superfluid DAO community on Gardens:
https://app.gardens.fund/gardens/8453/0xa69f80524381275a7ffdb3ae01c54150644c8792/0xec83d957f8aa4e9601bc74608ebcbc862eca52ab

7. Team Members

Core Contributors: Paul, Gossman, Mati, Afo, and Coi

8. Social Links

9. Dune Dashboard

10. Contract Addresses

See Dune dashboards above. Gardens is deployed across 7 networks with community and pool contracts created per-community.

11. Networks

Optimism, Arbitrum, Base, Gnosis Chain, Celo, Polygon, Ethereum Mainnet.

12. SuperTokens Used

Communities stream Pure Super Tokens (including $SUP) or wrapped ERC20 Super Tokens into funding pools. The Superfluid DAO community on Gardens uses $SUP as its governance token and accepts Super Token streams into its growth funding pool. Streaming Conviction Voting pools settle outflows in wrapped or Pure Super Tokens.

13. Current Daily Active Users

65 daily active users - tracked via Markee:

14. Current Superfluid Volume

  • $322,819 in total capital flows across Gardens in Season 5

  • $87,754 TVL across staked governance tokens and funding pools

  • $235,065 total value allocated through Gardens funding pools

  • 123k $SUP currently held in the Superfluid DAO growth pool

15. Fee Structure

Gardens does not charge fees on streaming or funding pool contributions. The protocol is free to use, and communities only pay gas costs for on-chain governance actions (staking, proposals, voting, fund distribution).

16. User Persona

  • Community builders setting up governance and funding infrastructure for their organizations

  • DAO contributors streaming recurring funding into community pools

  • Public goods funders matching and directing capital toward ecosystem priorities

  • $SUP holders participating in governance and signaling pools

  • Ecosystem leads adopting Streaming Conviction Voting to power continuous, conviction-driven grant programs

  • Grant round participants registering communities for matching funds

17. KPIs

Season 5 grew the platform across every dimension we tracked. Activity rose to 3,916, capital flows climbed to $322,819, and the Superfluid DAO community deepened its $SUP stake and growth pool position. The one area we missed was active streaming into the Superfluid DAO growth pool, which fell off after Season 4 incentives ended. Streaming Conviction Voting directly addresses this by making active streams a natural product of governance itself rather than a one-off campaign behavior.

For Season 6, our targets reflect the public launch of Streaming Conviction Voting and the campaign’s emphasis on rewarding communities that adopt it.

Metric Season 4 Result Season 5 Target Season 5 Result Season 6 Target
Activity 3,643 5,000 3,916 5,000
Total Communities 159 166
Total Unique Members 2,556 2,744
Total Proposals Created 928 1,006
Capital Flows $282,165 $350,000 $322,819 $400,000
TVL (staked + funding pools) $85,738 $87,754
TVA (total value allocated) $196,427 $235,065
Superfluid DAO Community
Unique Members 1,046 maintain or increase 784 maintain or increase
$SUP staked in community 343k maintain or increase 735k maintain or increase
$SUP in Growth Fund 68k 150k 123k 200k
$SUP streaming into growth pool 12k/month maintain or increase No streams maintain or increase
Social Media
Farcaster followers (Gardens) 400+ 600 534 700
Twitter Followers 2,546 2,700 2,583 3,000

We will continue to track all metrics via our Dune dashboard and DefiLlama.

2 Likes
2

Hi Paul

I have a question about Gardens.

What has always confused me is this:

Everyone could create a community on Gardens, isn’t that so? And set up entrance criteria and make suggestions and open funding pools? If I were to set up a community and call it ‘Superfluid’, and if people were to join my community and add funding and/or votes on funding pools I had created - what legitimacy would this “governance” have with regards to the actual Superfluid DAO?

Who would actually OWN those funds, and what would happen if a proposal was ‘approved’, but noone could carry it out because we didn’t actually have the credentials to go and modify the Superfluid protocol, or whatever we had ‘approved’?

I hope my question makes sense. It may be that I just haven’t paid attention, but I’m missing the link between Gardens governance and ‘actual’ governance of a DAO. What guarantee do users have that they are not being lured into supporting pro forma proposals that have no real-life support?

2 Likes
3

Hey Joan, thanks for the response. Great questions!

The short answers:

  • Governance tokens staked is a good signal of a community’s legitimacy. For example, the Superfluid DAO community on Gardens is currently the largest community by SUP token’s stake at about 650k SUP: https://app.gardens.fund/gardens/8453/0xec83d957f8aa4e9601bc74608ebcbc862eca52ab
  • Funding proposals are executed onchain based on the parameters set in each pool, so they are very much owned by that specific community only. Keep in mind only the Council Safe for a community can create a governance pool.

The longer answer:

For offchain actions (like a protocol upgrade as you mentioned), you do need a third party who plans to execute that action based on the result, so creating a community only for yourself and supporting your own proposal obviously wouldn’t hold much weight for anyone outside your community.

That said, Gardens is very much designed to enable that type of bottom-up governance if you did feel you could get momentum within some part of the broader Superfluid Ecosystem. Anyone is free to create another Gardens community with SUP as their governance token, rally members to join, and collectively govern whatever aspect of the ecosystem they can resource.

This design allows for organic ecosystems to emerge with many different sub-groups that might be competing, collaborating, or even completely oblivious of each other:

GOxq8TiXsAEkwHD
GOxq8TiXsAEkwHD2236×1108 228 KB

1 Like
4

Thank you! :slight_smile:

This could well be the essential puzzle piece that I was not aware of


If I look at the Superfluid DAO on Gardens, the Council Safe is specified to be 0xff621d7361e0c93bedd29de00133e9c7f7afb6ab.

I do not see any obvious way to confirm whether or not this address is being held by anyone in ‘actual’ Superfluid DAO governance - is there a way to do so, easily? (Sorry if I’m missing the obvious. I appreciate any help to learn!)

In any case, I could of course always ask the Superfluid team. Which means that there IS a way for me to check if some Gardens community I might consider joining is actually legitimate. And if I find that it is, I can trust that governance pools in the group are always similarly legitimate. That’s good!

I guess I still don’t see how the design you describe sufficiently protects people who may not always do their own research from being lured into funding scammers - but I do see how it can be a feature to allow for permissionless bottom-up initiatives.

I don’t think 650k staked SUP on Gardens is enough to make substantial decisions on behalf of a DAO that had a quorum of 16.2M SUP in the most recent governance vote. But sure, it’s a signal that can be interesting, as long as everyone is in the clear about what are actual governance votes of the DAO, and what are ‘just’ grassroot initiatives and signaling.

1 Like
5

Hi Joan, the signers in that Safe are 6 people from few different projects in the Ecosystem:

  • Myself - Paul (Gardens)
  • Hadar (GoodDollar)
  • Graven (Flow State/Beamr)
  • Gossman (Gardens)
  • Mati (Gardens)
  • Elvijs (Superfluid)

At its current size, the Gardens community for Superfluid DAO is definitely more ideal for funding smaller grant funding proposals (maybe $1-5k), which is what the Builders Fund is set to help with. At that small an amount, it doesn’t really make sense to create an SIP and have so much governance overhead for such a small funding decision.

The Gardens communities that are most successful are ones that set up many different funding pools, each for very specific purposes. Since Gardens allows governance params for each of those funds to be set separately, each can have its own group of voters that have context on that specific decision.

The Builders Fund has only accumulated ~$1k in SUP so far, so it’s not enough to be meaningful for the ecosystem, but it would be a great place to add $20-30k from the broader Superfluid budget to give ecosystem builders lower friction access to small amounts of funding.

1 Like
6

Ah, great - this is really valuable information. Thanks again.

Would it be possible to somehow make this important context more visible to current and future users of Gardens (I’m thinking of the Superfluid DAO specifically, but other communities could maybe benefit from the same)?

Like, maybe you could add a dedicated section on the community page to sum up what you just explained - in particular the note on who the signers of the Council Safe are?

Hearing your explanations, it’s very clear to me that I - as a user - have not shared the same understanding of the platform and how communities on Gardens work as you guys have. But I think a little strategically positioned information could go a long way to improve that.

1 Like
7

Great ideas - and good timing as we’re in the process now of overhauling the layout of the site to make it more intuitive & easier to understand. I’ll bring this up with the UI/UX team.

1 Like