[Closed] @neaprotocolnews & @trending.near Instagram JULY

Marketing DAO Marketing DAO
, ,
1

Hello everyone. This is Aman, a nearian for about a year. I have been contributing in NEAR Ecosystem projects lately and an Instagram account for NEAR.

A brief overview about the past : Instagram community accounts had 5-6 accounts running and @nearprotocolnews & @trending.near were two of them.

image
image1080Ă—1080 86.7 KB

@nearprotocolnews and @trending.near are not connected with INSTAGRAM COMMUNITY ACCOUNTS project now and running the separate proposal and plans. We decided to go separate so that there are no confusions.

@nearprotocolnews is followed and appreciated by NEAR Protocol Official , Mintbase, OFP, Ceras Ventures, Realitychain, Marma J Foundation, Nate Geier (Co-founder Mintbase), Creatives DAO, NxM, Some devs etc. and recognised by NEAR Big Brain.

@trending.near Recognized/Followed by NEAR’s Biggies:

NEARWEEK, Open Forest Protocol, NEARity.org , Graffiti DAO, EthDenver, EXXAVERSE, etc.

Our july insights :

image

@nearprotocolnews

image

@trending.near

Budget asked for the work done : We had published total of 80 posts including reels and 49 stories.

Budget : 80 Posts x 10$ = $800
Account management $200 x 2 Accounts = $400

Total : $1200 for 2 Accounts.

Future plans : As we said we will go independent and our plans will be different. We have the best reach among all update/news accounts in NEAR. We have better content posting and we will be doing so in future. Also organize quizzes or some community events to attract more web2 and web3 audience to NEAR and aware them.

@neaprotocolnews : Will focus on news, events, push near ecosystem content and much more.

@trending.near : Will focus on insights, major updates, analytics, infographics, weekly highlights and much more,

image
image1080Ă—1080 180 KB

image
image1080Ă—1080 132 KB

Sorry for making it delay as it was the process earlier to put proposal after the work. To change it and make it easy for councils to understand we will post the proposal in advance from September month.

Tagging @marketingdao-council for visibility, Thanks!

3 Likes
2

Thank you for proposal ! Happy to support

3 Likes
3

Thankyou for the support sir​:+1:

1 Like
4

Tagging @marketingdao-council for the visibility :pray:

5

Hi @iamanansari

Thanks for the updated proposal. I like the content thus far.
Looks like your numbers are steadily growing.
https://www.instagram.com/trending.near/
https://www.instagram.com/nearprotocolnews/

When you are repurposing content from other creators, how often do you tag them in the post?

Just to clarify, are you requesting reimbursement for July?

2 Likes
6

Hi @Klint sir, First of all thanks for the appreciation!

We post our original posts on timeline while sometimes we do post content from other creators on Story, we give credits to the respectful owner by mentioning the accounts.

Yes, it got delayed sir due to changes and delayed response on proposal/report. I would try to make it in sync as soon as possible after publishing report for August too.

Thanks again for taking time to review. :blush:

1 Like
7

Thanks for your proposal,

Would you be able to provide some more information on the split from the Intragram Accounts community? When did this split happen? Has Instagram Community Accounts already received funding for July, August, or September that includes these two accounts?

2 Likes
8

hi @satojandro sir, thanks for the review

It was suggested by Lorraine in our June funding Proposal that we should go with only with 2 accounts for better reach of content.

After the July report, there was confusion and lack of decision on which two accounts will continue to be funded, we tried different approach for clarity but nothing worked and at last all accounts owner agreed to go individual and post their proposal on forum if they want. As a result, @trending.near and @nearprotocolnews decided to post the proposal together.

No sir, as stated above it got delayed due to lack of decision and delayed response. I will make it in sync asap. These two accounts are not funded after June still we kept posting on accounts till now.

Thanks.

9

Hey guys – I typically do not support retroactive funding requests. I can’t support the proposal in this form.

10

Unfortunately, we don’t normally give funding retroactively for proposals. Sorry I cannot help this proposal along further.

11

Thanks for providing more context.

There are a couple of issues I have with this proposal. One of them is that as we try to reduce the funding to Instagram Accounts, it doesn’t make sense for us to now have all the accounts that were part of that conglomerate now applying individually. Another issue is the retroactive nature of proposal, as the amount being requested would have to be multiplied by 3 as we are in September now(?). Finally, we are receiving more applications from active and high quality initiatives and we are directing funding to those that can have the highest quality. I revert to Taylor’s comments in regards to the nature and quality of the work and the lack of attribution.

I do not support this proposal.

12

Whoah, same combined comments from the councils @satojandro @Klint @so608 . Kinda demotivating tbh.

About the retroactive behaviour - The proposal got delayed till August due to lack of clarity and delayed response from @marketingdao-council end when it was asked to choose two accounts as the council suggested to keep only two. Proposal was delayed this much not due to our end.

This was also retroactive, posted after July work in August. Why there is no such comment of Retroactiveness? Where is the equality?

This was also retroactive, asked funds for May, June in June end week.

I have respected you all and learnt from you all since my journey here. Sorry to say but didn’t expect this hypocrisy here.

There are result, audience we built and kept posting regardless of funding. If you all combined think can break our confidence and dedication with this behaviour. You are WRONG.

Thanks for taking your precious time to review after such delay.

13

That is in your hands to review the proposals and choose to fund the accounts which deserve if they all posted proposal individually. Rejecting this proposal on the basis that there will be other insta accounts proposal doesn’t make sense chief.

14

Hi Lorraine, July month report was posted on 5 August where we asked councils to decide the best 2 accounts

also, after councils didn’t respond to it I posted the PROPOSAL for the same, but councils asked for clear proposal as except Dacha no council selected their best 2 accounts

Then the whole Instagram team decided to post the proposal individually. In the whole procedure, we lost a month. Also, we kept posting on our accounts.

I have personally messaged each and every council to solve it ASAP but didn’t got any reply from there…

Still, we getting such comments is disheartening to me. Everyone knows we are late, but I swear I was always on time be it any council question or any other suggestion.

I have always asked for councils for suggestions and have implemented them quickly,

First I posted

July Report,
July Proposal
another July Proposal

the whole procedure wasted time.

But you are already up with your decision, I respect it with my opinion here.
Thanks for the review. Have a great day

15

Thanks @Klint sir, you said you loved our content and growth but are still not supporting us for some reason.

16

Don’t think there will be any reply now on these questions from the respected councils @so608 @Klint @satojandro :blush:

2 Likes
17

Couple of things to clear up:

  • Sending a flurry of angry is not likely to change the outcome of an application. If there is disagreement, please try to keep it casual and respectful. When we have made mistakes in the past or changed our minds as more information is presented, we do review and can change status of proposals. However, we exit the room when it descends into personal insults, attacks, accusations, and overall impassionate claims unrelated to the proposal.
  • Three Council members replied with similar messages as we were on our weekly call where we discuss pending applications. I was the one who provided the most details (efficiency, Taylor and Lorraine didn’t spell out all the details after we reached consensus).
  • The retrosprective element of the proposal is was not the single deciding factor. It was reviewed in light of the history of Instagram Community Accounts, current structure, quality on content, amount of other applications, among others.
  • We can and do exercise our discretion on a proposal by proposal basis, see above on the many factors considered
  • Great to hear that the proposal not going through is not deterring the team’s efforts. Thanks for the work you are doing and let’s keep things open to more proposals in the future.
  • If the team has questions that are content specific, I suggest you try to arrange a time to meet with @so608 or @Klint directly.

Thanks for your understanding.

2 Likes
18

Thanks for your reply on this @satojandro , I do understand talking further won’t change the decision, I respect that and the comment was casual not any angry nature but a explanation on the retroactive behaviour and some other retroactive proposals that got approved.

I just wanted to clarify that there is no personal attack, I shared what I saw on the forum in other proposals so the rules stay same for everyone. Was curious to see if the retroactive rule differ person to person.

Thanks for clarifying there were other reasons as well, would’ve been great if you guys mentioned them at the first place.

Anyways, I would love to meet you for guidance and suggestions for the accounts if you have time. Thanks!

20

Hi team – you raise a good point about the remuneration and it being retroactive – the reason I typically do not support retroactive funding is due to the difficulty around providing feedback and guidance on things that have already happened. I prefer to be able to ask questions and weigh in on future activities before allocating funding.

What you have raised in terms of retroactive/timing is important, and I think it is something we need to address and come to a consensus about it if possible (though there are always things the council members do not agree on, which is the whole point of the DAO structure, many different opinions involved).

In order to have the discussion, we will need some time with NEARCON coming up and a pause in our regular schedule/weekly meeting because of that.

Aside from the retroactive funding, I still have concerns about continuing to fund Instagram accounts that are from what I see very focused on pushing out a lot of content, but not driving a lot of engagement around the content that is resulting in drawing in new active members of the NEAR ecosystem.

It’s all well and good to point to follower growth and impressions, but from there, how can we determine what impact that is having on the adoption of NEAR and growing of the community?

We are in the midst of a pretty rapidly shifting situation with the community – see all the NDC activity as one example – and because of that, I have been very carefully evaluating proposals in order to stand behind the ones with the clearest value propositions and those that are new experiments vs. ones that we have watched and funded for months without substantial traction. My decision on this is in no way personal, but rather honestly an effort to re-evaluate a lot of projects that have received ongoing funding and, in many cases, pause as needed to work on the particulars with the proposers until we can be confident in the allocation of funding as a good decision.

I hope that offers a better explanation of my thinking. Please feel free to reach out to me directly.

1 Like
21

Hey @so608 , Thanks for the detailed comment. I really appreciate it.

Agree with your point here, things are changing for good in NEAR. There’s no issue with that, we just dropped our reason of being late.

Thanks for taking the issue into consideration :innocent:

Gotcha, we would love to hear suggestions personally from your experience to improve so that we can drive more engagement and bring active NEAR members.

Let us know when you are available for a meeting.

I understand that very well, reason why even after some proposals being closed after review I never stopped respecting you all. This time too, my only concern was about the retroactive funding rule difference for different to different person. All good, I would be respectful as I always have been.

Thanks again for taking time to give a proper explanation, really appreciate it.