Fund 15k through grant, or existing Exchange funds

[Julian Fletcher-Taylor]

After discussion, the exchange committee believes that given the current grant round limitations, it may be beneficial to use existing Exchange funds that were earmarked for future costs that came up between grant rounds rather than put in a grant for 5k FCT this round. If we did that, the exchange committee would have around 5 k USD of value left over in total funds. This is simply a question of how large a pot of money we want sitting to be able to be applied to any exchange related activity that comes up, without having to wait for a grant round.

I have attached a poll, feel free to discuss and put down your choice, and with this info we may pull the 5k FCT exchange committee grant and fund it through existing funds instead.

 

[David Chapman]

Use the grant round when you can and thus in this situation. The Exchange Committee needs funds at its disposal for when an opportunity arises between grant rounds.

 

[Matt Osborne]

Exchanges are going to cost a lot of money. We have nowhere close the amount of money we will need. Pulling the current grant is taking a huge unnecessary risk in a time when we can't take any risks with exchanges.

 

[Michael Lam]

While I agree with David above, that it would be terrible to run into a situation where funds were not available to access new exchanges if an opportunity presented itself. I'm also off the opinion that something needs to change with the way these types of grants are funded. There is no transparency to the grant, and not even future transparency. I'd like to see at least the guides apprised of the situation who can vouch for what is going on behind the scenes, even if they can't divulge info. And it would be nice to also have some future clarity on what will be divulged. For instance, if we are added to an exchange, then that would trigger the release of information related to this grant. If we are not added to the exchange, at what point can we expect to know what the funds were spent for, even if it wasn't a successful opportunity. I believe everyone in this ecosystem so far has demonstrated integrity with regards to funding, but large grants with no transparency don't have good 'optics' for token holders or others who aren't on the inside track.

 

[Julian Fletcher-Taylor]

As it stands, we will be keeping the grant as such. It seems the better of the two options at this point. I will continue to monitor this thread though.

 

[Jason Gregoire]

Hi Julian, IMO, I think the 5k FCT is a marketing committee expense and would make sense to come from those funds.

That being said, if the marketing committee spends resources (with polled community's support) and requires additional funding, it should ask for such funding from grants. Probably a little late for this now for this round, but maybe an approach to consider moving forward.

 

[Samuel Vanderwaal]

@Julian Fletcher-Taylor can you close this so it doesn't show up as an active vote in the governance tab? Thanks!

 

[David Chapman]

I've set it to close in one hour.