observing catalyst pilot these days as we reach submission deadline for proposals extending products building with/on cardano pilot has received over 80 applications so far - yet you'll see often zero or small number showing publicly that's because curation program is hard at work - sending proposals back with feedback loops for rework this means proposals may be visible for a short while just enough for next curation pass at it before it's sent back with aggregate feedback it's not perfect but it feels like we finally found a working formula in lieu of deprecating legacy community review program - building upon lessons acquired from moderation bounty in preceding rounds that set the scene for this integrated solution we've moved from google forms into embedded platform the long standing desire to issue proposer feedback in advance is being tested live - and - it's working few kinks to tweak, including some of the workflows, UI, but ton of useful observations, adjustments & further automations for efficiency for v2 in the bank what that means for proposers? those proposers that submitted early benefit the most - have highest chance of passing curation gate those proposers submitting last minute benefit the least - have higher risk of being rejected when i said we're serious about levelling up - i meant it - turning page

Aug 19, 2026 · 9:38 AM UTC

10
2
28
1,452
Sort replies: Relevant Recent Liked
Replying to @dannyribar
For transparency, I’m a proposer in the Catalyst pilot. I like the clearer curation framework, but I’m less convinced by the adoption metric. Tx counts/fees aren’t the end goal - teams, apps and protocols creating real utility are what ultimately drive network value.
1
3
61
agreed - we are nominally on the same page have mentioned it elsewhere but within context of this pilot in isolation - it's generally about establishing a standard denominator for varied projects that works for the moment - not a statement around L1 sustainability/economics - as that's a larger than catalyst question, far larger tbh the pretty part about this pilot implementation as now presented is - what 'we' as an ecosystem care about can be added/swapped/worked around as iterations progress so establishing that up stream makes it easier for programs like catalyst to incorporate downstream hence why i think it's the lack of deliberate ecosystem scale coordination that works and helps establish that in practice - budget cycles as of recent have been a bit all over the place (reminds me of legacy catalyst)
1
45
Replying to @dannyribar
This is the way! In hind-sight, this seems common sense. It will create more "serious" work for the proposer, but "serious proposers" is exactly what is wanted. Love it!
1
2
28
sometimes it's hiding in the plain sight 🫡
1
17
Replying to @dannyribar
Have curation stage started yet Danny?
1
1
15
Replying to @dannyribar
I wanted to ask a question about this box in Acknowledgements. What if I'm building an integration for an existing TRL 5 project that is open source but is not mine, am I able to check this box or not?
1
39
basic assumption in pilot is that projects you work on are 'yours'
1
83
Replying to @dannyribar
danny, this is a fundamentally flawed approach to put it kindly. i've spent all day so far drafting feedback to the foundation that i just sent
1
70
👀 what’s the feedback, sounds like a good intel for future iterations; one of key objectives of this pilot is to observe and iterate quickly
1
1
35
Replying to @dannyribar
This is good. Filters on the front instead of filters on the back. Much more efficient ✅
1
104
Replying to @dannyribar
Very interesting, I love that excellence. 👍
1
44
Replying to @dannyribar
I love whats happening here but curation work is hard 🥲 but we will keep pushing.
1
80
Replying to @dannyribar
Congrat on this excellent work you are doing for the benefit of the Cardano ecosystem and community.
1
68