Hello Everyone,
I keep seeing marketers requesting about 300k USD for brand awareness for Polkadot. They are usually coming from people and companies that are in the crypto space and their viewers are usually also from the crypto space. I want to start by saying that I am not a marketer. But, 300k is a lot of money. I also think Polkadot should not be marketed to people who are familiar with crypto. Why? Because people familiar with crypto should already be aware of Polkadot. So, to me, it is double marketing and not doing much for the Polkadot brand. I understand for many big companies, 300k is not that big of a marketing budget for brand awareness. But, I think this type of money can buy segments from very well-known influencers that get regular millions of views on YouTube. I will give one example of such a YouTuber: Mr. Beast. On average, he gets about 30 to 70 million views on each of his videos. I think he can be convinced to endorse Polkadot for 300k on one of his videos. On top of that, his reach is well outside of the crypto space. So Polkadot will branding will reach the masses outside of the crypto space (which I think it desperately needs). Mr. Beast is also known for his philanthropic work and ethical nature. So, the transparent nature of Polkadot may appeal to him, and he may endorse it. I know it is OpenGov, and it will need to be Mr. Beast who has to make this proposal. But, perhaps someone from the Polkadot team or someone from this community can introduce this project to him, and if he is interested, show him how to set up a referendum. Please note that I don't personally know Mr. Beast, I am just using him as an example. Any other big-time influencer (preferably with a good reputation) <span style="font-family: Poppins, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; background- text-decoration-thickness: initial; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration- display: inline !important; float: none;">that gets over 10 million views regularly on a single video will do, for that kind of money for brand awareness. I think 300k for 10 million + views is justifiable. Just food for thought. Thank you.

-Fossil112

I keep seeing marketers requesting ~$300k USD worth of DOT on OpenGov. I want to spit ball some ideas to better spend that money.

Deprecated Post

It has come to my attention that the Head Ambassador program requires some kind of a deposit of 5k DOT. I hear many people cannot apply because of this barrier, and as such some are calling it the Whale Ambassador Program. So many applying for the position are asking for a sponsorship or are not applying at all. While I am not against having a barrier to entry. I am against having this steep of a barrier. So, I am proposing this lower the barrier to entry from 6k DOT to 500 DOT. Who is with me?

Polkadot Head Ambassador Desposit is Too Much

Hello Everyone,

I am seeing some issues with the new Head Ambassador program. I believe full disclosure is necessary as to who is sponsoring them for greater community transparency.

1. It has come to my attention that a hefty sum of 5K DOT Decision Deposit (DD) is required to apply for the Head Ambassador (HA) program. This translates to about $28,750 USD or ~5.75 * 5000 DOT. Many HA candidates have resorted to seeking sponsorships because of the steep barrier to entry.

2. The DD was not mentioned in the original Ref: 487. You would think such a crucial detail should have been included in the ref. But, it wasn't: https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/487

3. Some in the community are calling this the Whale Ambassador Program. Including a former HA: Alex Promo Team: https://forum.polkadot.network/t/feedback-needed-new-head-ambassador-application-requirement/8549/43?u=alexpromoteam

So based on the above issues and in the spirit of transparency in OpenGov. I will request any HA that has successfully won their bid for the HA position to disclose who their sponsors are. This includes providing wallet addresses and Transaction IDs from the sponsors (It should add up to 5K DOT). It can be posted as "HA Sponsorship Full Disclosure" as a topic on Polka Assembly.

Full Disclosure for Head Ambassador Sponsorship

Hello Everyone,
The ChainAnalysis Ref 1065 is about to pass in less than 6 days. Obviously, the community is against this. So for those who haven't voted against this. This is your best chance to turn things around. If you have already voted, make some noise on Twitter to get the attention of the people in charge of Polkadot to vote against it. If this ref passes, it will cost the treasury over 6 million USD. This will be another waste of treasury funds without any real strategy or accountability.
This isn't the first time the ChainAnalysis team are requesting funds from the treasury. They say they provide Anti-Money Laundering and Know-Your-Customer compliance services. The thing is, as far as I know, the regulators are not asking for these services from Polkadot. To date as the SEC has declared Polkadot a software and not a security. These laws generally apply to Wealth Managers and Broker/Dealers. On top of that, the regulators are not asking for these services from Polkadot, Web3, or Parity. On top of that the original ref 684: <a href="../referenda/684">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/684</a> ended with a NAY vote because they failed to convince anyone that this service is mandatory or necessary.
So, instead of taking the loss gracefully and with dignity. ChainAnalysis went on to create ref: 785: <a href="../referenda/785">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/785</a> . This time on the Root Track which costs 100k DOT as a decision deposit to create. It is generally implied that they had help from the whales to go this route (potentially from Giotto DF). The Root Track is usually used by the Polkadot developers to make runtime changes etc. Most people are not aware of this track, and from my understanding, on this track, DVs cannot use their delegated votes. So a ref canceller was used to stop this ref.
Having learned nothing. They still came back again demanding 6 million USD while barely changing anything from their original ref. Don't forget that their solution is proprietary and not open source. So should they leave or we have a fallout, we lose the code base and would have no alternatives. There are alternative solutions being developed by the Polkadot ecosystem that are open source. But, the whales would rather keep pushing ChainAnalysis.
You can vote here: <a href="../referenda/1065">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/1065</a>
If you are feeling disheartened about the chances of beating the whales. Please see the recent examples of the Polkadot community beating the whales:
Shutting down the Marketing Bounty: <a href="../referenda/920#CNjCm02X0vkczcDR3XHo">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/920#CNjCm02X0vkczcDR3XHo</a>
Shutting down DED Marketing: <a href="../referenda/834">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/834</a>
So please make your voice heard. Anyone please chime in if I missed anything, or got something wrong. The ChainAnalysis people have been at this game for a while now, and it's hard for me to keep track of everything they have been up to. But, they are suspect if you ask me.