TL;DR: This is the revised edition of the proposal to launch Bankless Peru. We reduced the funding requirement and added some comments based on community feedback.
Full proposal
Key points
In our draft proposal, Bankless Peru asked for 320,000 BANK per season for two (2) consecutive seasons. For our final proposal, we ask for the reduced quantity of 285,000 BANK per season for just one (1) season.
We have erased content translation and IMN content promotion as part of our work specifications. A/V production and writing will continue being part of our responsibilities because they are necessary to maintain engagement and build social visibility.
FAQ
Ain’t your project similar to an IMN?
Partially. We have been criticized that our project will do the same as an IMN-derived node. This would be true if we did not ask for autonomy and decentralization to conduct our own governance and framework.
Part of our objectives and responsibilities involve content creation. This is essential to our work and not sufficient argument to be involved with the IMN. Bankless Africa and Bankless Brazil enjoy this same benefit of being distanced from the IMN. They do this for their own specific reasons, as we do.
Why don’t you work with the IMN?
Not to be involved with the IMN is not only for convenience, but something practically impossible. The IMN is divided by languages, and joining them as our own node will involve direct opposition with the Spanish IMN. We believe that the Spanish IMN does an inefficient work and have strong arguments for It to be dissolved, but Its existence is a matter of democracy and a simple majority ballot. In this regard, we will easily lose. Most contributors in the Spanish-IMN, from other Hispanic countries, will not want to have their node divided or another Hispanic node to compete with them. This is because they don’t have the ability and resources to build their own local node (except for the Mexicans, probably) or because that would be “unnecessary competition”. We think differently and prefer to rely on the judgment of the community at large to resolve this controversy.
What is your main objective?
Our main objective is to expand the most important and efficient web3 media & education DAO in our wary and corrupt nation state. The difference between developed and developing countries are abysmal regarding financial education. This makes people rely on institutions and universities to get educated on these topics. Even if there is much more information freely available on the internet, they won’t risk it. Bureaucracy-derived renown is necessary for people to trust and invest. This applies to educational brands like ourselves and many others.
Have you heard some people say, “Regulation is good for crypto because institutional investors will join the party, which is good for adoption…”? We follow this same approach. Our main objective is to create a local brand, do some hard-work, and team-up with sociopolitical institutions & co. in the road to grow the bankless mission.
Are there any clearly defined KPIs the project should fulfill in order to justify the requested funding?
Isn’t Bankless Peru a next logical step into an expanding Spanish Media Node that eventually makes its way into a SubDAO like Bankless Africa and Brazil? Maybe the way is to grow the Spanish Node and let it naturally divide into subnodes for different Spanish speaking countries?
Yes, both are defined in the Google Document. I didn’t want to make this post too long.
It isn’t a logical step. Growing the Spanish node won’t add something to establish our node, neither will reach to the audience we target. LATAM countries are really different, and we mostly grow communities based on nationality instead of language.
Thank you for resubmitting your proposal based on past feedback.
Bankless Brasil started out in the IMN, became the biggest node and only then spun out. Bankless Africa had been working for well over 6 months before asking for any funds. In your case, there is no history of contribution, almost everyone in the team is on a guest pass. Hence it’s really difficult for me to understand on what grounds this project should be funded.
I understand your arguments on separating yourself from the spanish IMN, in this case, I can suggest that the spanish IMN can be a subDAO similar to South Asia (Bankless South Asia DAO Report(Jan-April)). You can have several hispanic communities producing relevant local content under the same subDAO as opposed to a completely independent chapter with no history of contribution.
Finally, i would like to invite you and others to join us in the IMN channel so we can possibly work towards a common solution.
yoyo, we met Cris in Crypto#1750 (@crysincrypto) one month ago and onboarded her to the DAO, she start contributing in the IMN discord server contributing with graphic design.
We met the rest of team in a local crypto conference and connect since the beginning with the bankless movement and has helped us to draft the proposal
Thank you for the updated proposal and budget however, the questions asked in the previous forum post, especially over the budget still remain without an answer.
Let me explain:
If your plan is, according to the (previous proposal) because it is eliminated in the current one, to translate and distribute Bdao and HQ content, this is something that is already being done for your language by the Spanish IMN. Therefore it is a double spend from the Bdao side.
Marketing & Growth and Sponsors and & PR are exactly the same things in their essence/tasks. + The IMN team has teams that are assisting in both domains
You are asking to be compensated for Events beforehand, without them being planned or being close to being held since your community has not even started existing. There have been previous decisions on the GC level that provide retroactive compensations for events and not before the events take place.
The educational material/ product described in the proposal is already created by BDAO and HQ and is already translated and distributed by the Spanish IMN.
As for the IMN. The IMN gives 100% autonomy to the nodes participating in the project to create their own governance framework that serves their needs and remunerate their contributors in any way they want to.
The governance framework of the IMN itself is still not finalized and open to suggestions and improvements.
You have decided from the beginning, due to reasons I do not understand, not to participate in the IMN, not even be at the IMN server, and to come up with a proposal that in its essence describes what the IMN nodes do but with an ask that is at least 2x of the average IMN node and no proof of work.
The squad does not even include 1 Bdao member and most of the members do not even have guest passes.
I know that I am coming off as aggressive with this message, but honestly, it is not my intention. I deeply care about the IMN and the DAO and if such a proposal passes there will be practically no need to have the IMN project and every node can go to the GC (asking 2-3x the budget they use now) which will end up with the DAO overspending for things that the IMN has solved.
Once again, please before going forward with this proposal, introduce yourselves to the IMN, join us in a session and let’s discuss and find a way forward together.
