Last updated 4 years ago
Have an open fund
Problem
Have an open fund? Instead of multiple 'challenges' with restricted $. Therefore allowing the voting to choose what's important.
Total to date
This is the total amount allocated to Have an open fund.
About this idea
It's not possible to know what $x is reasonable for each challenge without knowing how many solutions there will be for that challenge.
More proposals. Less confusion/subjectivity about what they need to meet.
Conversely, Failure looks like 4 proposals in 'community choice'.
How many proposals do you get.
It's not possible to know what $x is reasonable for each challenge without knowing how many solutions there will be for that challenge.
An open fund allows the vote to choose what is most important or what proposals are the best without arbitrary restrictions of having to meet a challenge, or how much $ is allocated to the challenge.
An open fund also means that the purpose of community advisors (whom costed $250 each in fund2) probably becomes moot. Which personally i think is an added benefit, because I believe they are an unnecessary cost that doesn't help or influence voters anyway.
