You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Gridcoin Joint Marketing Initiative 2018

in #gridcoin6 years ago

I've been thinking about this for a few days since it first posted.


I'm personally strongly opposed to using foundation funds for anything other than development. This means I cannot support marketing points one (Google adwords), four (BOINC Netsoft) and five (Fixed campaigns).

I am of the opinion that Josh's creative work can fall under development. I support paying him to create resources for the community.

A word of thanks:

Despite not agreeing with where the funding is coming from, I am nevertheless thankful to those who have put in work on advertising. Thanks!


An interesting opinion. Would you like to elaborate further, how do you think we should finance our marketing campaigns then?

Three points (listed below from worst to better...)

1. Marketing campaigns do not need to be need to be financed - we could allow natural community growth to happen more slowly or increased community activity in the BOINC and science spheres could be harnessed instead. This being said, it would take huge effort to follow the proactive route and so it is not necessarily a viable point at this stage.

2. We are an altruistic coin. We focus on furthering science - right now we actively accomplish this through increasing contribution to BOINC. The community, being altruistic, can self fund marketing out of their own pockets. I know I'm willing to. I am just not yet able.

3. Both points 1. and 2. can be argued against and have their own shortcomings. Incorporating side staking into the Gridcoin Research Wallet will allow us to generate a marketing fund. This, instead of the currently limited foundation funds, can be used to finance marketing campaigns.

  1. Waiting for natural growth isn't exactly called marketing nowadays. Waiting for natural growth is precisely that - waiting. Under no circumstances you can call that a "marketing campaign".

  2. As far as I know, such a self-funded marketing account is not even established yet. In any case, I have seen zero news, posts and donation drives about it so far. Under such circumstances, I believe we can also classify the whole thing as "waiting".

  3. I find this side-staking proposal somewhat absurd, because I believe Foundation is also staking and receiving interest, so it's not 'limited' as you are implying. Basically, you want to establish another fund, very similar to the one we already have. Looks like a redundant task at best, and waste of time and energy at worst.

1. Agreed. It's an alternative. Not a campaign.
2. This is in response to your question. How do I think we should finance out marketing campaigns.
3. That is correct - I would like another fund established. I still view the Foundation as limited.

I think where you and I have different views on this is that I am willing to sacrifice potential immediate growth to have greater potential to pay a growing development team in the future. You are willing to potentially sacrifice future ability to pay the development team because you are willing to bet that we will be able to pay the team in the future if we grow now.

Gridcoin Foundation has about 30 million GRC, currently worth $4.2 million. We are paying devs $30 per hour. That's enough for 140 thousand hours of development or 16 years of non-stop coding.

You are saying that if we spend something on marketing and go down to let's say 15 years, the future of Gridcoin development is in question?

Thank you for reading my blog and supporting it. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help with GridCoin. Thanks again, Nate

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.29
TRX 0.12
JST 0.033
BTC 63464.16
ETH 3111.33
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.98