Thanks for your answer, you got my question wrong though. I know these both are your projects 
I wanted to know if the DAWG was involved in the design of @dannweeeee jupiversekit website. I love it. 
2 Likes
They’ve already proven Thier worthy hence they should get our full support
1 Like
Hey friend, thank you for supporting us. All the other working groups are focusing on non technical community members, our focus will be on the technical folks. We want to motivate existing community devs to build more and also bring more devs to the space
1 Like
ah sorry. No this is work that @dannweeeee did, very nice i agree!
2 Likes
Thank you friend! Much appreciated
1 Like
This is a solid proposal! Konstantinos is one of the most hardworking and diligent people I know in the Jupiverse. He has already proven his value with Catalytics, and I have no doubt he will achieve even more. I believe he’s fully capable of leading the DevRel Working Group.
Voting YES for his team because of these reasons!
1 Like
The creation of the DRWG is a step in the right direction. However, in order to meet expectations and maintain the trust of the community, it is important to:
- Define clear KPIs and progress evaluation methods
The proposal currently lacks specific, measurable goals and metrics that would allow for an objective assessment of the group’s effectiveness after three months. This makes it difficult to make informed decisions about continued funding. - Adjust or more thoroughly justify the budget
The requested amount of 59,000 USDC over three months seems excessive for a trial phase, especially considering that other working groups have launched with significantly smaller budgets. This raises concerns and sets a precedent for an “expensive start.” - Ensure regular reporting and transparent communication
Clear, consistent updates will be essential for maintaining accountability and building confidence in the group’s long-term value.
One important area that seems underdeveloped in the current proposal is the lack of data-backed evidence demonstrating the demand for your services in previous periods. While the proposal highlights general issues such as outdated documentation and the need for better developer support, it does not provide concrete statistics or examples that would allow the DAO to properly assess the scale and urgency of the problem.
To strengthen the proposal, I recommend including a breakdown of incoming requests and developer support interactions over the last few months. For instance:
- How many support tickets or Discord questions were received per month?
- What were the most common categories of requests (e.g., SDK usage, API issues, integration help, documentation feedback)?
- How many of these requests went unanswered or were significantly delayed due to resource constraints?
Providing this kind of data—ideally in the form of simple tables or graphs—would give the community a clearer picture of the current pain points and help justify the formation of a dedicated DevRel team with the proposed scope and budget.
Without this, the proposal risks being perceived as a proactive but perhaps premature step, rather than a necessary response to clearly observable demand.
Thank you so much <3
1 Like
- Define clear KPIs and progress evaluation methods
The proposal currently lacks specific, measurable goals and metrics that would allow for an objective assessment of the group’s effectiveness after three months. This makes it difficult to make informed decisions about continued funding.
The KPIs are listed in the proposal. There are around 20-50 developers per day asking for help in the dev support, to solve their problems some1 has to understand what they want to build, understand jupiters API and adjust to their needs.
Have you ever visited the developer documentation? This is a page that is constantly getting improved and updated by the Jupiter team + DevRel team.
Have you seen the code examples of the jupiter products at the DevRel repository?
All this are listed in the proposal, at the end of this 3 months we will have visual representations of what we did to exactly show what we have achieved. With numbers.
- Adjust or more thoroughly justify the budget
The requested amount of 59,000 USDC over three months seems excessive for a trial phase, especially considering that other working groups have launched with significantly smaller budgets. This raises concerns and sets a precedent for an “expensive start.”
We are senior developers with excessive proof of work done in the community since summer 2024. The compensasion will be 5.500 USDC per person per month.
Do you think this is an “expensive start”? I would encourage you to ask your favorite AI or google what the avg salaries are for senior devs. You will quickly find out that with this ask we drastically underpaid.
- Ensure regular reporting and transparent communication
Clear, consistent updates will be essential for maintaining accountability and building confidence in the group’s long-term value.
This is something that we are going to provide and prepare during the 3month trial so that we are ready for our full WG proposal.
2 Likes
This seems like a balanced budget with a successful track record backing it up.
2 Likes
I’ve observed the dedication and effort your team invests, and I recognise that it demands a full-time commitment.
I fully support this initiative, as I believe having your expertise within the DAO is invaluable. I consider this role equivalent to a full-time position for your team. I will be casting a ‘yes’ vote on this proposal.
1 Like
Thank you very much Kingmads, really appreciate that
2 Likes
As this is the correct topic for this post I’ll link it up here:
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.