Combined, New Project Camapigns and Community Campaigns comprise 33% of the proposed SUP ( 5M out of 15M ). Under this proposal, Superfluid Foundation will have sole discretion in distributing this allocation. For clarity, I am not objecting to this aspect of the proposal.
That said, given the significant percentage involved, these sections of the proposal are very light on details. While the notion of reserving allocation for new projects is appealing and worthy … the true value will be determined by the methods used to onboard these new projects. What does the Foundation plan to do? Grant Applications? Hackathons? Frontier guild style programs? Other?
The “Community Campaigns” category has almost zero information. To be fair, this is consistent with past seasons. Community Campiagns has always seemed like a “black box” … nobody really knows what is included there or exactly how to participate. The “call to action” button has been to mint the Ecosystem NFT, and people will do this because …. “I will get SUP if I mint this” … which doesn’t – by itself – contribute to the Superfluid ecosystem. Most don’t really understand the purpose of the ecosystem NFT (including me). That said, I think we need this category. I think it can be improved with more intentionality and transparency. Over several seasons, one thing I have learned – sometimes the hard way – is that SUP campaigns are most effective when 1) the earning actions are clear and explicit and 2) farming is costly. A related proposal here is for creation of sub-campaigns within the Community Campaigns category, which would help with transparency and would likely incentive participation in more areas, compared to the scenario where the sub-campaigns remain in the “black box”.
I completely agree with your hesitation on the “Black Box” of Community Campaigns. Ambiguity in earning mechanics usually leads to low-value farming.
Your note on “Clear Actions” and “Costly Farming” is the precise formula for high-retention users. This is where the Established Projects category needs to do the heavy lifting. The most effective distribution channels aren’t generic contests; they are the active applications that have already built specific, verifiable loops for their users.
We should ensure the “New Project” onboarding mimics that rigor, requiring clear mechanisms before the tap turns on.
@markcarey thanks for sharing the questions and feedback on New Project Campaigns and Community Campaigns.
Community Campaigns
Your point about more ‘intentionality and transparency’ makes sense. The Foundation Marketing team will share more information on that and take onboard this feedback.
In the meantime, I wanted to share some data on Community Campaigns. The data so far indicates that Community Campaigns have been an important driver of growth for the SPR base and benefited engagement with other participating campaigns.
75% of all unique SPR claimers first started using SPR through Community Campaigns.
Of those, 42% subsequently went on to use other participating ecosystem apps and claimed from their campaigns as well.
Based on this data, it seems that Community Campaigns are acting as a major entry point to SPR and many Community Campaign users go on to use other ecosystem applications. DAO continuing to invest a small portion of it’s seasonal distribution (20% in this proposal = 3m of 15m budget) through Community Campaigns could be beneficial to continuing growth of the SPR base.
Would welcome other data points and perspectives on this. For sure the additional information on the Campaigns would help as well.
New Project Campaigns
Thanks for raising those questions around the what and the how of this component. The rationale behind the Ecosystem Steering Group is to solicit input from those that have direct experience building and operating Superfluid integrations in practice to figure which approaches are most likely to have the most impact. Your questions seem like the right ones for that team to consider.
Sharing this list from Foundation marketing team. Some past examples below of ecosystem projects, initiatives and user groups targeted for Community Activation SUP campaigns, which had led to the above 38k new users of SPR:
Astroblock
Community discord roles
DegenDog
Ecosystem Pass
ETH Denver NFTs
Fraction
Intract quests
MysteryBox
Planet IX
POAPs
Ricochet
Social account followers
SuperToken interactions
Yoinks
Hi @nomadicframe, nothing ready to share on that immediately but will pass the request to the marketing team.
Searching on Superfluid X, Farcaster and Discord, you should be able to find the comms and CTAs for many of them.
This is the most important improvement in Season 5.
The 5% per-user campaign earn cap directly fixes the biggest recurring problem in SPR:a handful of whales capturing a disproportionate share of SUP emissions.
We’ve all seen it: campaigns with healthy participation on paper, but where rewards concentrate into a few addresses while the long tail of users gets scraps. That’s bad for:
Perceived fairness
User retention
The long-term credibility of SPR
Capping individual earn rates:
Forces emissions to spread across real users, not just capital-heavy actors
Makes campaigns feel worth participating in for normal users
Aligns SUP with growth and engagement, not extraction
This single change does more for ecosystem health than almost any parameter tweak in prior seasons.
Thanks everyone who participated in the vote for [SIP #11] Ecosystem Campaigns - Season 5.
Voting period has ended and the proposal passed with 99.9% votes FOR.
Results available here on Snapshot.
As mentioned in the proposal above, next steps scheduled from Monday 16th February include:
Established Project Campaigns
Invitation to submit Campaign Ideas will go live.
New Project Campaigns
Invitation to submit Campaign Ideas will go live. note: later this week, aiming to post an update from the Ecosystem Steering Group with guidance on this
Community Campaigns
Due go live from 16 February onwards. Foundation Marketing team will provide updates on this component.
