This is a great question ser.
It will amaze you that all leaders have agreed to come to one submission under this DAO to work better.
One of the major challenges of the previous case was the independence of each individual trying to prove a point.
This led to multiple communities. With Africa DAO, It’s a collaborative building technique with same goals at a time with apt funding mechanism.
On this, I have made correction. The value there was the initial draft when much more activities were put up.
The present proposal has a more streamlined OKR and KPI to focus on and hence won’t be needing that kind of budget.
Again on the numbers, the DAO proposal showing xyz $$ doesn’t mean the actual funding proposal will be asking for same amount. Any value seen on this proposal is more of a forecast than a direct ask.
Good question and words here.
If we look critically, the best growing measures now isn’t solely on the individualism, but bringing in experienced hands from different ecosystems with track records.
There can NEVER be better growth than an internal collaboration. I speak as one who have had both separate and collective conversations with leaders from Africa. Both those from other chains and NEAR.
I would ask @Bakaka and @damboy22 to help with their words in driving this understanding too.
Dear Africa DAO members.
There are no barrier for internal collaboration. But when it comes to funding, the more people involved usually tends to lead to less personal responsibility. The history of DAOs, well beyond NEAR, has proven that there is a culture of ‘everyone gets paid, nothing gets done, there’s nothing you can do about it’. As long as each leader of Africa DAO is as proactive and effective as if they had to prove their own work only in order to access funding, it may work. Otherwise, it will just hold back the region as it may create a monopoly, grant too much power to individuals, and lack specific actions (we also discussed this well over a year ago as one of the principles for the OG Regional DAO: no one should monopolise an entire region’s name)
If you look at this proposal and the previous ones, you will notice the silence in ‘compensation’.
If you want to check the TG group with all African leaders, a DM on TG will do.
This isn’t packing everyone under one control. This is everyone saying we want to build together.
I don’t think there is any leader from Africa who is against this. Maybe I haven’t heard the said person.
In the governance document, you can see the list of all communities from Africa there. It’s a WE BUILD TOGETHER and not LET ME HAVE THE POWER.
Maybe I should tag all leaders involved here so it’s obvious it’s not a one-man show? @satojandro
Hy, @satojandro good questions u have raised. But i think the document is explicit as to what goal and what strategies we are keeping in place to achieve those goals.
By and large as regards to “Everyone gets paid” because we all represent Africa, No No No and No, for a united community that is willing to build and grow the issue of we all get paid is not welcomed. If by your words everyone gets paid what will be left for building and growth? probably nothing.
As @IgbozeIsrael said you welcome to anytime on TG together with leaders where we all brainstorm ideas on how to Africa on the Web3 map.
Nice. We believe it can work not just for a community but for Africa.
Thanks for the tagged, @satojandro i hope all your concerns are well addressed, if not let me know where you need further clarification.
I won’t respond to any personal thoughts on the proposal because other members already answered all your questions.
Regarding, budget allocation based on regional GDP and GNP this is debatable and you have been saying this for a while now. I contribute to write a draft during GWG, feel free to read and add your comments Regional GDP and GNP issues
Have a nice day.
Thanks
Thanks Ell. For your support always true OG
Thanks for your support @blaze. It means a whole lot and we hope to leverage this opportunity to become the true strength we are.
Could you please provide the breakdown of the budget expenses. What exactly funds are requested for? How many people you have and what is the salary each of them, what is the cost of each partnership and what in it. User onboard - how to check how many we have now and what is the % of increase you expect (how you count users? just registered or who do certain number of transactions or similar?). How we can verify that this is African users? Would be great to have details on each KPI with current status, expected performance - in general KPI are good, but i have no idea how to verify the performance on each of them.
Percentage sharing of the budget is explained in the governance docs attached to this proposal. It explains how all these are to be done.
On this, we have a list of communities from Africa already existing. The DAO if approved is focused on using these existing communities to push the OKRs/KPIs collectively to be able to achieve them.
Regarding partnerships with Ecosystem products, the DAO won’t be asking for special budgets for these products. If the product has a special need they want to decide to sponsor a certain activity. An example is a wallet product helping with an initial 0.1 NEAR in magic links to onboard new users.
The campus tour has a max budget of $1.5k per campus as Leaders have already submitted their proposals.
The reason why we did not attach the extensive proposal is that we thought this wasn’t for a funds request yet.
If HOM approves Africa DAO, we will submit an extensive proposal that justifies our asking budget which can be less than the mentioned budget forecast. However, if you want to see the detailed individual proposal before voting to approve us, we will still send it here.
Thanks and we are here to answer all questions.
To clarify, detailed reports on activities done by each community or activity will be made available here.
The way to know these people are Africans is that one major focus of the DAO is to see that the message of NEAR goes native to those who need it.
An example is how KanoIsBOS onboarded native Hausa-speaking devs who are building on BOS currently.
Hi, will you get metric about onboarded ?
How users will be counted ?
Did you will the whole campus ?
Account Creation ?
Thank you in advance
Hello!
Thanks for these questions.
Firstly, our target for ecosystem partnership are any of the wallet team. This will help us keep track of all activities like wallets created. Meteor wallet team did a great job when we worked together in KanoIsBOS.
Also, sharddog is a great example of target to help keep track of these.
We also look towards a collaboration with pikespeak to make things much more better for us.
The strategies behind the Campus tour are P2P onboarding/education and generally, having an IRL meet.
The numbers of these will be rightly counted and also keep count of the retention rate.
We are focused on building an on-chain dashboard that helps keep public track of all these numbers too.
If there are any questions left to answer, I am here to give clarity.
You say you want to onboard 5k people into the ecosystem, will they be real NEAR believers, or just people who created a wallet because they were paid or asked to do so?
What would be the interest of these people in creating wallets?
I have never seen anyone predict exact numbers for the regional community, and especially such large ones, it looks extremely suspicious.
Why didn’t you go to Globe DAO for funding?
Where can I find a detailed budget with all expenses?
If you need $20,000 for 5,000 users, can we pay you $5,000 for 1,000 users to check what kind of users they are?