And even the comparison with ethhub was in that case wrong because ethhub got funds in round 3 whereas antipro did not.
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
But in general "Vitalik and other EF elites have wrong opinions about what kinds of work are valuable" is an argument that plays right into quadratic funding being great and very important
. Seems like the case is strong that QF grants are at the least valuable as a complement.Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Maybe it is worth clarifying somewhere that grants are designed with funding future work in mind? Cc.
@owocki -
I would have said "recent past work". But IMO better just let it be what the community wants it to be.
- Još 4 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Backpay or runway. Austin Griffith is good backpay example, I donated to him in CLR 3 because of a bunch of unpaid work he already did to further the ecosystem.
-
Agree. His burner wallet is
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
We’d never do it for $20k
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
The real question is why i am not mentioned in your criticism of gitcoin grants?
I earned that 7 dai with my 10 000 + tweets/memes ( not retweets ) last 4 years .
2020 will be lit AF!
https://gitcoin.co/grants/386/wolfofethereumeth …Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
I think the problem is that too many people are stuck on the idea that what gives money value is someone on high telling the market how to value it. This sentiment is a luxury, and will end in due time. In crypto, we're supposed to be rewarded by our participation (ie via mining)
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
Prikaži još odgovora, uključujući one koji mogu sadržavati uvredljiv sadržaj
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.