Moonbeam ecosystem sector experts

Hello everyone,

The purpose of this discussion post is to gauge community feedback/thoughts.

Quick one-line summary:
Should the Moonbeam Foundation have “sector experts” that focus on the growth of the different sectors ( DeFi, gaming, SocialFi, NFT, etc.) in the Moonbeam ecosystem?

There are different sectors in blockchain ( DeFi, gaming, SocialFi, NFT, etc.) To have a great ecosystem, we need to have a lot of successful dApps in each sector. There is an increase in dApps that want to build on Moonbeam. There are different pain points for building dApps in different sectors.

Should the Moonbeam Foundation have “sector experts” who aim to analyze the pain points and growth of dApps in each sector?

The sector experts can help identify critical issues in specific sectors. For example, a gaming sector expert could find it hard for developers to build games on Moonbeam because of xyz reason(s). The ecosystem expert can report to the Moonbeam Foundation and provide details on the progress of each sector. This way, strategies can be better developed to grow each sector. This will benefit the entire Moonbeam ecosystem.

The ecosystem experts would be responsible for talking to teams of each Dapp in their particular sector. If you are a sector expert for gaming, you should speak to the teams of each gaming dApps. The sector experts could even identify if specific dApps would add more value to their respective sectors than others.

In other words, the sector experts are the “boots on the ground.”

What would be the requirements to be an ecosystem expert ?

  • Can dedicate a minimum of 10 hours per week to being sector experts. This includes talking to teams, developing KPIs, analyzing pain points, and reposting findings to the Moonbeam Foundation.
  • The sector experts should have some background experience in the sector they are applying to.

Should “sector expert” be a paid position, and if so, how much?

I am looking forward to hearing the feedback of the community.

1 Like

hey Chris, i think this discussion makes sense. it’s important to have experts who can monitor projects, identify weaknesses and help in development to gain traction. isn’t this a task of the BD team?

in light of the ongoing bear market, where many projects are likely being more cautious with their expenses, so i’m unsure whether the Moonbeam Foundation has any additional funds available to dedicate to this area. however, given the importance, perhaps we could use funds from the Treasury or Grants if needed. but if this discussion gains traction, then it looks like this is something the community will have to decide

should it be specific companies specializing in this direction, or should we choose from the community members, similar to how we choose a grant committee?

how can we control the effectiveness of these experts? it is extremely important to understand their communication strategy with the community regarding their activities. what indicators or benchmarks will we use to assess their impact and determine their contribution to projects in terms of identifying ways of growth and development?

i’d also be very interested in the views of projects developed on Moonbeam. do they see this initiative as a current priority? are they open to collaboration and inclined to heed the insights and recommendations from these experts?

1 Like

Thank you @turrizt, for the reply and thoughtful analysis.

Yes, the BD team can also do this. But the BD team also has a lot of other things to do. I think sector experts would focus most ( if not all) of their attention on their specific sector. The sector experts can work with the BD team to develop strategies.

Great question. I think the community should vote on it like we do for the grant committee.

Each expert needs to determine what KPIs they will focus on during their term. They should also state goals and benchmarks. That will make it easier for the community to evaluate.

Each expert should do a monthly report on the forum summarizing the changes in KPIs. The experts should also summarize their discussions with projects in their specific sector.

Yes, I am also very interested! Having input from established projects is crucial. If we do have sector experts, collaboration with projects will be crucial.

@turrizt, here are other thoughts I had:

  • There could be a 6-month pilot program to test the effectiveness of having sector experts.

  • The sector experts can work alongside the ecosystem expert on the grant committee. The sector experts will provide many insights ( KPIs, dApp development point points, etc.) for each sector. With this info, better decisions could be made about improving each sector. @Jim_CertHum would love your feedback in this regard. Would you see value in having sector experts working alongside the ecosystem expert?

  • Another benefit of having sector experts is that they can ( or should) determine which tools/dApps are missing/needed from each sector. This way, the Moonbeam Foundation can better understand where to focus its resources.

Thank you all for taking the time to read this. I would love feedback!

1 Like

I appreciate your input, Chris! my primary concern is the specialized nature of this field. It necessitates experts who not only have a profound understanding of the market but also possess experience with specific strategies. moreover, they should be adept at managing projects during prolonged bear market phases. given the expertise required, the cost of hiring such specialists might be significant. we should definitely discuss this further and seek input from other community members

1 Like

Thank you again @turrizt for your analysis.

Here are my thoughts on your comments.

I think a founder who has build a startup or startups in the specific filed could considered an “expert” ( perhaps expert is not the appropriate word ?).

Yes, agreed.

I think it depends on how many hours per week we want them to dedicate. For context, a grant committee member needs to dedicate at least 10 hours per week and gets paid $2,500 / month. Perhaps we can apply the same logic to sector experts. We could also do a 6 month trial period with a low amounts.

Yes feedback form other community members is crucial!

1 Like

Hi @chris.casini , thanks for asking for my opinion on this, and it’s an interesting proposal and I do have some thoughts.

In terms of the grants committee, at least in the past and when needed we have reached out to external sources for specialized feedback – those with expertise or knowledge in certain areas. This has always been informal, and I would expect this to continue in the next committee whether I’m a part of it or not. We know within the community there are experts in all of areas mentioned in your original post by just looking at the teams that are building on Moonbeam.

Your suggestion would seem to formalize relationships and more directed towards the Foundation, and so I can’t answer for them, but I can share my thoughts as a community member.

Perhaps community members or ambassadors could look to provide what you are suggesting in the form of tags that show where their expertise lies or where they have an interest in – not mandatory but optional, and @_phyn maybe has some thoughts on that.

@turrizt mentioned about the BD role, and when I worked in large service providers, the Sales organizations would sometimes be split up into sectors or verticals (e.g. Banking, Retail, Manufacturing) but these were Sales organizations with literally 1000s of people. Would that be practical for the size of Moonbeam? I’m not sure but again probably more of a question for the Foundation and what their strategy is around this in terms of focusing on different sectors in web3.

So to answer your question to me directly: “Would you see value in having sector experts working alongside the ecosystem expert?” – yes, absolutely it would be beneficial and not just for whomever holds the ecosystem expert role in the grants committee but to the community as a whole, but I’m not sure if it could be practically delivered today as formalized roles (not a question for me to answer). Maybe a good starting point would be with Ambassadors.

1 Like

Thank you @Jim_CertHum, for your in-depth analysis and feedback!

I have added my thoughts to your comments bellow.

Yes, correct. I think formal positions would be a good look for the ecosystem. This would especially apply to users outside of the ecosystem.

That is a great idea!

I also agree that it would benefit the whole community overall. I believe it’s more of a question of practicality (as you correctly pointed out).

I see your point. More feedback from the community and foundation would be great. To see the practicality of having formalized roles.


Thank you so much again for all of your feedback!

I invite all members from Moonbeam to provide feedback!

1 Like