CreDAO was (mostly) a weekend project at the EthBoston hackathon in Sept so there’s no new initiatives taking place here, but as part of the Retroactive Cred Activation we’re creating Initiatives for past work. Then once Supernodes are ready we can insert past work into the SourceCred graph and flow Cred to the project contributors. Due to the living nature of SourceCred if anyone wants to keep contributing to the Initiative they’ll earn even more Cred as they do 
Are you suggesting to add the CreDAO GitHub repo directly into the SourceCred graph along with the other SourceCred repos instead of creating a Supernode Initiative for it, or both?
Either way,
- If we end up using CreDAO for SourceCred’s on-chain token management then it makes sense to add the repo to the SouceCred cred graph directly as it would become part of the core SourceCred experience.
- Until then, however, it makes sense to use the Initiatives/Supernode system because A) we need to dogfood it, and B) we don’t want to set a precedent of manually including adjacent repos into the core SourceCred graph. We don’t want to have ongoing debates over what gets added, why, and who adds it. That’'s going to get complicated. Luckily, we don’t have to. Cred Curators/Historians are incentivized to add Supernodes to the SourceCred graph via the community facing tools we provide (Initiative, Artifacts, etc…). If nodes are useful more Cred will flow to them, but if not then it won’t. Historian/curators are then incentivized to create and update Initiatives for things that are (or will be) useful. This is good for anything related to SourceCred, but that is not directly part of core development of the SourceCred protocol itself.