Please vote Nay, Preimage removed.
Beneficiary:We decided to postpone a decision over sub0 Europe and unnoted/removed the preimage. Please vote nay
Comments (16)
Proposal Failed
3
of 3Summary
0%
Aye
0%
Nay
Aye (15)0.0 PAS
Support0.0 PAS
Nay (65)0.0 PAS
Comments (16)
Hi, I'm trying to get in contact with you guys. I was told you were responsible for the Decoded account on X. Some in the community have noticed the overall quality of the tweets (formatting, tags) is really poor. This is the main event event of Polkadot and the shown quality on X is just unacceptable. Feel free to contact me so that we can discuss about the improvements you should engage. If i'm wrong and you don't manage it, let me know.
Hi, great to see sub0 back on so soon!
Two points about funding transparency:
One, given there have been 'surprises' at previous flagship events regarding the spending on these, and what they actually translated into during the event, would you object to presenting this section as line items?
Onsite event staffing, agency fees, markup, crew travel, venue scouting, pre-trips, crew catering, etc. 30,000 200,000
They account for over 25% of the total amount and seem to be different categories of spending in both qualitative and quantative terms which (without wishing to cast aspersions on this proposal) is what people do when they want to hide things within accounts.
In particular, I would like to see:
* 'agency fees' and 'markup' separated out from each other with a note as to they were calculated.
* 'crew catering' and 'crew travel' separated out from each other and broken down — does 'crew' here include the Decentred staff, and if so, are they on the same level of travel and catering as the crew?
* 'venue scouting' and 'pre-trips' separated out from each other (if they are not the same thing) and broken down — what are the costs in scouting the venue?
On a separate point, I see you used a short term EMA (EMA7) with DOT at its lowest price for a year.
Obviously, if not hedged and DOT appreciates (as it is likely to), that's a profit for Decentred.
But in case DOT depreciates, can you confirm that you will not need to dip into the proposal contingency, either because the risk will either be hedged, or because Decentred both holds sufficient funds for, and will apply those funds to, the difference?
Cheers
Hi, I'm trying to get in contact with you guys. I was told you were responsible for the Decoded account on X. Some in the community have noticed the overall quality of the tweets (formatting, tags) is really poor. This is the main event event of Polkadot and the shown quality on X is just unacceptable. Feel free to contact me so that we can discuss about the improvements you should engage. If i'm wrong and you don't manage it, let me know.
Hi, great to see sub0 back on so soon!
Two points about funding transparency:
One, given there have been 'surprises' at previous flagship events regarding the spending on these, and what they actually translated into during the event, would you object to presenting this section as line items?
They account for over 25% of the total amount and seem to be different categories of spending in both qualitative and quantative terms which (without wishing to cast aspersions on this proposal) is what people do when they want to hide things within accounts.
In particular, I would like to see:
* 'agency fees' and 'markup' separated out from each other with a note as to they were calculated.
* 'crew catering' and 'crew travel' separated out from each other and broken down — does 'crew' here include the Decentred staff, and if so, are they on the same level of travel and catering as the crew?
* 'venue scouting' and 'pre-trips' separated out from each other (if they are not the same thing) and broken down — what are the costs in scouting the venue?
On a separate point, I see you used a short term EMA (EMA7) with DOT at its lowest price for a year.
Obviously, if not hedged and DOT appreciates (as it is likely to), that's a profit for Decentred.
But in case DOT depreciates, can you confirm that you will not need to dip into the proposal contingency, either because the risk will either be hedged, or because Decentred both holds sufficient funds for, and will apply those funds to, the difference?
Cheers