Let me just get straight to the point, the cosmos ambassadors program that the community voted yes a while back is not really working out.
Most of the so called ambassadors on Reddit or Twitter have not posted or done anything to bring awareness to the cosmos ecosystem and all the new developments happening on it.
I would like to know or confirm if the community pool is still paying for this program and if so how many in here would appose a proposal to abolish this
(ambassadors program)
Proposal #89 is a good example there a few more as well.
I will try and update this post tomorrow with more finding and information.
I am also interested in listing ALL past expenditures/grants that are still active. The community should be able to easily find this information at any time and be able to reassess fund deployment. It’s not ideal to spend money and then forget about it for years. This matter is so important, that it could be pinned on the forum as first post tbh.
It doesn’t need to be overly complicated, just a simple list of all active grants, dates, key points, and individuals involved.
It could reveal the reality to more people: we are paying for many things that are not benefiting us, which could improve holders’ awareness, implication and agility.
Flagged for reporting misleading and incorrect information. Our funding from the Cosmos Hub community pool was for just 5 months and ended a year ago in April 2023. Flagged also your misleading post on Reddit.
I think it reinforces my initial thought that we need a post that tracks active spendings. That would have probably avoid OP’s misleading information.
I’m sure the information regarding the end of this grant has probably already been shared somewhere on the forum. However, for the average user, keeping track of every spend and manage fragmented data is impractical. Therefore, an interactive post that succinctly summarizes all pertinent details would be greatly appreciated.
I never said how long it was or how much it lasted.
I just used prop #89 as the one prop that stands out and is easy to find.
Even though CosmicValidator took the payment there works lacks on the quality and engagement.
( technical aside if we are being honest with ourselves those videos do not justify the price tag that was paid)
However, I have been trying to find more information regarding this topic and compare those to my findings.
To which i have decided to hold until i can confirm if they are true.
I’m asking if anyone that has any information or any concreted prove of ambassadors beings paid by the community pool.
Entities or people being paid by the community pool to promote or reach individual investments mostly retail investors be that by youtube or other social media.
Cosmos Hub never had an ambassadors program: teams/individuals typically receive x amount of atoms promising x things to the Cosmos Hub community, who then has to vote and decide whether to grant the sum requested.
As good practice, some teams (see AADAO) offer community reports over objectives, but this is not yet the norm.
While I really appreciate you calling out people who received ATOM from the community pool to be accountable for what they promised, I also find that a post like the one you made is not correct in its form and can mislead people in many ways. A good way to do it would be to include links and transactions that refer to specific governance proposals so that we can debate them.
Thank you for your input and clarification regarding the process. Including links and transactions to specific governance proposals is indeed a constructive suggestion for fostering more informed debates. I’ll keep that in mind for future discussions on accountability within the Cosmos Hub community.
In the meantime I asked for help on countless occasions from the community and if anyone could help me verify those findings.
As it seems no one cares enough about this topic and I understand that my post can seem misleading but I haven’t named anyone without any concrete proof.
The example of prop #89 is a representation of what this topic is
about.