We do intend for giveaways to be both intentional, and to foster direct and measurable growth and reach. If people agree that the extra 100/month going directly to the community is too much then sure, we can nix it, but I really feel like we’re being incredibly nit-picky here.
While our podcasts have been a bit more long-format, the tutorials are HYPER-efficient and content focused. I agree that there’s efficiency in specialization. Consider us a specialist in media. Our tutorials will be excellent.
I plan to keep creating. I have to be able to justify the time commitment, and without any resourcing I cannot. This is a passion of mine. This is something I enjoy doing intrinsically. The opportunity cost I’ve sacrificed to get this far is too great, and unsustainable.
Sure the reach is small. The entire ecosystem’s reach is small. As that changes so will ours. Our month over month growth is over 100%. Continuing our pace but adding outreaches, live-streams, tutorials, and more will only continue to grow our reach exponentially.
I understand the “come back here once that’s happened” sentiment. It takes money to make money. Our growth has been real and measurable. We need resourcing. If our growth DOESN’T continue exponentially, THEN we should not be resourced.
Again, I think giveaways are a bad play. It comes off as scammy…Do this, follow that, write this blah blah. It’s not effective at attracting quality. Leave the giveaways to BSC projects
Passions are an interesting concept. My passion is photography, do I make money from it? Sure. But asking for money to put more tools in the box is a loan.
So many of my friends who are “creators” sacrificed their time for years, grinding their mornings and afternoons (before and after their 9 to 5). They might get a job to shoot Ducati but how often does that come around? This is why most of them start a Youtube channel, a podcast, writing Medium articles, being a tutorial specialist on Fiverr, streaming on Theta.Tv. So many endless ways to diversify your service offering to followers.
The system (streaming platforms) is set up to reward those who consistently create content and attract users. The more you create the more you are rewarded. The hardest balance of them all is when to monetize your platform. This dude https://www.youtube.com/user/TheTaikster has a strong follower base but refuses to monetize because he can sustain his operations through his investment strategies. Double-dipping could jeopardize his reputation. Bitboy is a perfect example of what not to do. An asshat in true form who continues to double-dip those stubby toes and will gladly sacrifice his reputation.
Someone had mentioned delegations from the powers that be. If they like what they see, maybe you’ll find more support on your node “if” you continue to add value without asking for it. All big “ifs” I get it. But it doesn’t hurt to try.
The hurt from trying comes from the opportunity cost of the time, effort, and independent finances put in. I will continue as much as I can for as long as I can. This setup strongly benefits the independently wealthy, which I don’t say with a negative connotation, but rather to show that IF we fill a niche that needs filling, as I believe we do, then replacing us would likely take getting somebody else that is very well off and capable to intrinsically choose to betroth themselves to this ecosystem, or to properly resource a different party with a similar vision. If we were solely attempting to make it big with this platform for personal gain, we wouldn’t intentionally limit ourselves to just Secret Network.
The resources are readily available to not necessitate our continued sacrifice while we pray for delegations. This pool and tax was created for this very reason. Also people with large delegations to their nodes already also receive community pool funding for the jobs that they do and the contributions they make. Maybe we’ll get delegations. Maybe we won’t. Regardless this ask is not out of place in the slightest.
Weekly podcast released 8am est every Sunday, Secret Sundays
Possibly some podcast episodes with videos / livestream
1 weekly tutorial
Either roughly 1 series of multiple short videos (2-5 min),
Or one standalone tutorial close to 10 min.
It depends on the function we are building the tutorial for
Interview people cross-chain and bigger crypto players @Elon Musk
Realistically people from Terra, Cosmos, Monero, etc
Get community more involved with suggestions for both podcast questions and tutorial suggestions
I’m sure you have a method to all the madness on organizing and maintaining relationships with stakeholders of each dApp and chain. Might be worth noting that using your podcast/website/youtube channel to inform subscribers what data privacy is, how it’s abused, what value our data has to prying eyes, and what news related to privacy is discussed weekly.
Can you explain what tutorials you have in mind and what your method would be to inform new users?
–Written
–Video
-Medium used (Website, Medium, Youtube, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Twitch, Theta Tv, etc.)
Also, something that I’ve seen recently is the term “alpha” and acronyms that only a person in a tribe would understand. Will you reframe from using this industry jargon to capture a broader audience?
Currently, what percentage of your node is self delegated by Secret Code Podcast?
You dont have to apologize for anything. You are seeking funding and you are very much entitled to request it, thats the point of a permissionless network after all.
At the same time nevertheless, it is difficult to see where the return or potential return for the network is at the moment with the current metrics. I am not personally against either of you, just the idea of continuous funding.
I really appreciate your responses. We’ll let the chain decide on the updated version and whatever happens is the result we’ll live with. Thank you very much for voicing your thoughts on the forums.
I don’t want to detract too much from the conversation around Secret Code Podcast funding, but it seems to me that it semi-fits within the discussion around node incentives: How to Incentivize new Validator nodes
Eric (& team) are clearly very active members of the community, and would benefit from a delegation “restructuring,” which would also alleviate some of the concerns around their ask for this quarter.
Agreed, this is exactly the point behind when projects make delegations to nodes. They reward those people contributing to the community that require support.
I definitely see your point, but I don’t think that’s seeing the forest for the trees.
They’re building an audience for/with the Secret Community. If it were a pure general cryptocurrency podcast, sure. However, they’re not. They’re acting as representatives for community. In addition, their level of engagement with committee meetings and general coordination is worth speaking to.
From what I can tell, their ask is also low in comparison to other committees, isn’t it? For example, @cow.level is receiving 5k SCRT per month for the data committee, totaling 45k in 3 months (to be clear, I’m NOT objecting to that amount!), whereas they’re asking for 10.8k over 3 months to be divided amongst 2 people.
Thanks to everyone for the engagement and feedback. Paul and I have discussed your input and our options, and have decided to move forward with this proposal to governance as follows:
We are removing the KPI for weekly tutorials. We will likely still do some, but that will be of our own volition, and not included in the mandatory measurables.
We have removed the ask for a discretionary budget. Should we get substantial delegation and/or raise advertising money, then the goals we have had in mind for this budget can be done on our own.
Updated Compensation Request:
Eric | Secret Code Podcast: 1,500 SCRT monthly
Paul | Secret Code Podcast: 1,000 SCRT monthly
For the 3 month period of 10/01/2021 - 12/31/2021 this would be a total ask of 7,500 SCRT.
