The final funding decision for each proposal is available on the DAO’s transparent score sheet. The score sheet also includes detailed comments and feedback from the DAO moderators, which can be accessed through this link:
For proposals that were not accepted for funding, especially those with scores between 7 and under 9 points, we are happy to schedule a call with the DAO councils to provide guidance and help with revisions for the next funding round.
Don’t forget to join our community call on March 20, 2023, where we will listen to the community, plan for AMAs regarding funding, and answer any questions related to the funding decisions. The mods team will also provide updates on the timeline for the next funding round, which will take place in April 2023.
We understand that the process can be challenging, but your patience, perseverance, and collaborative spirit were truly appreciated. We look forward to connecting with those DAOs who did not receive funding in this round to provide support for future submissions.
Besides, we are excited to see the successful outcomes of the approved projects and the impact they will generate for the ecosystem. Please proceed by submitting a poll to Creatives Astro DAO. The poll should include: Name of DAO, Creatives DAO funding [Month], total request amount in USD , Target wallet. After your poll on Astro is approved, follow the instruction from step 3 in this Community Payout process.
@williamx@creativesdao-mods first i must say welldone for all your work. however, i am not comfortable with the score that was given to planet lukukul. our entire proposal is focused on artist support, we interact with the forum and astro dao (considering our number and age), we have grown organically in such a short time and this proposal has the potential to make us grow even more. i would like to understand better what went wrong?
yes i saw the scoresheet and comments what i’m saying is the scores given to planet lukukul doesn’t tally with what we deserve. we didn’t get points in places that are our strengths. i can understand decentralization because we have only 2 council members but not many of the other places. i would love that call because there’s clearly a misunderstanding about what we are doing. where and when will the mods be sharing the meet schedule?
Burlesque Dao got 0,375 on decentralisation when we have 2council members and 2moderators, in just 2 month of existence, we got 152 members on telegram, 1.2k followers on Facebook, 680 followers on Instagram, over 300 followers on Twitter, plus 480 organic followers on YouTube yet we got 0,25. Burlesque Dao created a telegram quiz channel have over 30 active members interacting and engaging with daily quiz dropped by moderators yet we got 0. I guess this process isn’t perfect enough. I pray @creativesdao-mods to look into decision in approval of proposal in next funding round
Thank you @williamx and the rest of the @creativesdao-mods team for all of this hard work and the transparency in this report. I think this opens things up for a healthy discussion and I’m looking forward to revisiting this post. Cheers
Thank you for your work and objective criteria for evaluation. It is a pity that Philosophers DAO’s funding proposal was not approved. I feel it is a little sad, because I had no feedback on the proposal itself. And this would be a way for our community to engage. The lack of funding made everyone to be away, to not trust NEAR, to not give more time to create near products. We felt that this app we were proposing was the way to make the community interact, generate new interest, create a new service, and make our intention of bringing more academics and academic products to the blockchain. We cannot make the community active again without a new approach to the community. Philosophers and academics are people who do not trust easily, so the sudden lack of funding to activities made them distrust even more. They are not going to be active in the community unless there is already something to bring them to activity, as the app we were proposing. I feel that evaluate our proposal in terms of lack of internal and external communication would not help us to grow, but to die as a near dao. And create even less interest for them to participate. And while I feel objective criteria are good, they talk more about how you would like the DAOs to organize and communicate with each other than about the projects themselves. It is ok to follow this path, but I feel that the proposals themselves are not being accounted so much. Thank you for everything.
The funding has been granted based on proposals being inline with NEAR’s strategic goals measured by the metrics system shared months back.
I do understand it takes time and effort to create proposals and it isn’t a positive feeling to see the proposals rejected however funds can only be allocated if there is alignment between NEAR goals and DAOs goals.
We hope to see more Philosopher’s DAO and other communities building together and creating proposals keeping the metrics as their guide to achieve more scores and a likelihood to get funded.
Beginning next week, we will have community calls in creatives telegram where we can discuss how as DAOs/communities, we can align better to get the higher scores.
Thanks Creative DAO mods for all your hard work. I would not want to be in your shoes! I thought creating the proposal was hard, but reading and assessing 35 would be excruciating. I am sorry to the DAOs that did not get funded. Hopefully the next one in April will work for you.
Thank you so much, @Cryptonaut, for your answer and feedback. We appreciate it a lot. It is sad to see our community leaving near ecosystem. Unfortunately, we cannot satisfy your metrics, given our community is not trusting near very much right now, so they do not seem to have the interest of engaging in that way (telegram and blockchain like), and I dont have the courage to tell them to build things, because I dont know if they are getting funded. So our group is acting more like an academic research group, as it was, than a dao with activities. We were 3 main people making our works to grow the dao. I dont know if @jsc2022.near or @adrimobbs will have the time to keep this project going with the approved metrics and without resources. I know I dont have. It is sad, but true. But I appreciate a lot you had taken the time to read the proposal, and all the support given to us during the entire time we had been here. See you on web3.
Thank for the update. There’s a mistake in the score for Near x art.
We have 4 council members. Our score is suppose to be 2 and not 1.25.
Activities are focused on artists support
30% of our proposal is for council work.
Our proposal is focused on onboarding 100% web 2 artists and creation of wallet which we have done in the past with good Prove of work to this. ( Find report here!
Internal interaction with Near Dapps
If you read our proposal closely, you will see that we plan to interact with nothing less than 6 unexplored Dapps built on Near.
Moreover, our proposal is focused on educating newbies on how to use Near Dapps and tool to their business and creatuve activities. (Reference: Spoken word bounty, paint & chill with Near, pet & wildlife contest)
I honestly don’t know why we were score 1.875 here. Please kindly address this.
Near x art has over 30 on chain members, 1000+ online and physical memeber.
We presented our roadmap for the year.
Internal Community engagement
We attended all the community calls and I have 3 claimed NFT from the community call. @kc_sollano can attest to this. I don’t know why we were score 1 for this instead of 3 See community call NFT below
I understand that the moderators may have made mistake with Near x art score, which is fine.
Near x art hosted the biggest art and cultural event in the web 3 space. ( See report and activity if this is not enough brand awareness for Near then you are definitely right to score us 1
Please, this is not coming out of a place of anger but to make things clear to the @creativesdao-mods for an adjustment. We believe mistake can happen. We hope this see correction in our score at least.
I was really hoping MastermindsDAO would score some brilliant points in this funding round, based on proposal being inline with NEAR’s strategic goals & clear road map as to Artist support and interaction with Near Dapps. Nevertheless we hope for the best as we keep growing on Near