This was supposed to be a comment, hence why the post rewards of this post are burnt.
Today I left a reply to @azircon's most recent post that you can find on his blog, but he muted the reply so now, anyone using frontends who allow this muting can only read it by going to the bottom of said post, and then click unhide. So yeah, the reply is pretty hidden now. I wonder why.
So, here's the reply I left on his post. For context, you can check his most recent post, but I basically outline every comment he made, and I reply to it, so no need to go read it (but you're most welcome to do so).
A response to Azircon
LeoFinance is not dead, it is rebranding. @azircon just took a thumbnail out of context to support an opinion.
LeoFinance is rebranding, and you can take a look at the post right here.
First of all, thank you for spreading the word about the DHF. Every Blockchain should have as many users involved in governance as they can. Second, thank you for spreading the Leo Proposal, we definitely need more votes.
Now let's get to it:
This is what it demanded.
Leo doesn't demand for anything. As any other proposal, Leo asks for funding and it is up to the community to decide if they support the it or not.
You've chosen your wording carefully to pain Leo as a bad actor by saying we demand when in reality we do the same as any other proposal.
If funded, yes from you. Why from you? Because you are the owner of DHF as a stakeholder.
All of the proposals are funded by the community. The way you frame this is to give attention to one proposal, when the reality is that the Leo proposal - if funded by September 1 - would only account for 10% of the total DHF.
This would be the only proposal in the pool that focuses on Marketing and bringing more users to our blockchain, instead of development aimed the existing userbase.
A 10% of any budget allocated for Marketing is healthy. Every company, project, blockchain or similar needs marketing to thrive no matter the circumstances.
Marketing and onboarding proposal from HIVE DHF, which doesn't even carry Hive LOGO.
Leo Finance is built on the Hive Blockchain and we are very open and public about it - you should watch the AMAs and videos we put out, we always mention Hive as the base Layer. But for the sake of the conversation, please show me where the Hive blockchain logo is on any of these Hive Dapp Logos:
Again, you are framing a factto accommodate to strengthen your statement.
The current top suggestion is BLURT :)
@trumpman is known for quirky suggestions, and I always reply in a funny way because he's a cool part of the Leo community, and ultimately he's a top Leo stakeholder and wants what's best for Leo and Hive.
By the way, Trumpman is voting for the Leo proposal.
The only reason it is the "top suggestion" is because you gave it a 100% vote - when you say you care about proper reward allocation when it fits your narrative. And you know, we leave it there at the top because everyone knows he's joking, and everyone in the Leo community knows how Trumpman is and we like him like that.
Your Problems with the Proposal
It is too expensive, unnecesssary and untimely, and will NOT deliver any of its promises
It's not expensive. At a $25 CAC, it is extremely competitive. CAC (customer acquisition cost) is measured by how much a company has to spend to get a new user. In this case, it doesn't matter the amount of the proposal, what matters is the CAC.
For context, take a look at these two images:
It is untimely
The bearmarket is the perfect time to attract new users looking for opportunities to grow. Plenty of projects and spaces are dying and those who invest in marketing and promotion will hit harder during the bullrun, because they built a name and a community during the bear market.
During a bullrun, the marketing space will be filled with paid articles, advertisements, influencers shilling shitcoins, new projects with new money etc. We will be actively competing with every single crypto company, project and blockchain to attract the same users. Right now the Ad Space is bleeding, prices are cheap and we would be competing with just a few projects for the attention of the users.
Oh, and during a bullrun, Hive has proven it needs little marketing, users rush back to hive during the bulls and people are eagerly looking for projects and they will leave after the bulls. It is the bear market when real, organic, retentive growth can be achieved. A user onboarded and retained during the bears is a user who will stick through many cycles.
It is unnecessary
The growth of the Hive blockchain cares to disagree. We need to grow, we need to onboard more users.
Leo doesn't carry the banner of Hive. They even have their own token.
This is normal for any crypto project and company to do, there are several reasons for this but you know them, you just want to frame that having an own token automatically makes a project anti-hive. 99% of crypto projects, no matter their base layer, have their own token. Again cherry picking and framing something to help your narrative.
There are plenty of reasons to point to them being extractors of Hive.
And yet you point to none, you just appeal to your authority and hope people believe this because you say so.
Admitting what they get out of it would be a hard sell to Hive.
We have already pointed this: By growing the hive pie, everyone other dapp on hive wins. Will Leo get more users? Sure, as every other dapp.
The fact that we have prepared a proper onboarding and tutorial process where we showcase every hive dapp so that the user can try them all out, should be enough statement.
But we've mentioned this, you just decide to ignore it because it doesn't fit the narrative of this post.
None of the leo holders own any meaningful amount of staked hive.
You didn't even do some research before stating this. There are have plenty of Leo holders that have a considerable Hive Stake, and all of our users want Hive and Leo to thrive, because they understand that if one does, the other one benefits.
The fundamental premise of founding LEO community was a mini-rebellion against large hive stakeholders, and forming their own token. They have openly said that they hated hive for years.
This is just hilarious. If by creating a community and a token the project is rebelling against the Layer 1, then virtually 99% of crypto projects are a rebellion to their base layer.
And no, check any AMA posted on @leofinance. Leo wants Hive to get better at what we do. Any criticism is constructive and hoping to point people to the problem, so that it gets solved. If open criticism is a synonym for rebellion oh boy, that sounds like a dictature. But hit is just your opinion, thankfully it's not what the majority of the community thinks.
Don't get me wrong, they have done plenty of projects, all very opportunistic. I was involved in quite a few.
This is where it all comes from. You lost money from CUB and you've made it your personal quarrel, and made Leo your enemy.
Founders do not hold any meaningful amount of hive.
Khal has plenty of Hive assets and will dox these wallets to a community member because he doesn't feel comfortable publicly sharing this - as is a crypto foundation, the right to remain anonymous or to not make holdings public.
You know this because it was shared in Mattermost but again you decide to state things as facts because it fits your narrative.
Paying people to get in a platform never worked for us, We have tried all these technique the proposal have mentioned before and they have all failed in the past.
We are not planning to lure people with the promise of money, this has never worked in the past and I doubt it will work in the future. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes, but I think we all agree we don't want to keep trying the strategy of alluring users with money that will leave once that money stops coming.
Why me? Why am I writing this? Am I a good person?...
This is just a Fallacy. You appeal to your authority and your holdings, trying to convince people about your statements without providing arguments. And by appealing to your persona, you try to take away attention from your actual post - which is contradictory, you'd think you make a post to bring your statements out to the public and yet, your final words attempt to undermine those statements and just make people rely on your authority.
They will be most likely needy. They will take the money and run. This is a certainty.
This proposal is not aiming to attract investors. It is aiming to attract users. Will some cash out? Sure. Will some power up? Definitely.
Assessing this proposal with parameters out of its scope just to have a negative statement about it is not the way to do so. As stated above, ValuePlan aims to onboard investors, the Leo proposal aims to onboard users. (I'm already prepared for a reply in the form of "too long wall text, I don't have time for this, I've stated my facts and I will make this proposal go unfunded") Investors need to see a thriving ecosystem, not a stagnant one as some could say it is right now.
You have personal issues with Leo, I get it, but the fact that you are campaigning so hard against this proposal without even wanting to see the results this marketing could bring, and that you prefer to try to shut it down before it even commences, speaks more about your personal views than about Leo.
With this post, all you are saying is "I'd rather see Hive not get adopted, than to see Leo spearheading the adoption." As a top stakeholder, it baffles me you put your personal issues against Leo above what you know is a good proposal for Hive.
You prefer to see the chain remain the way it is, with 10k users, than to see Leo double the size of the chain.
You don't have a problem with the proposal, you have a problem with Leo.
Good thing we're working on making this as transparent, clear and solve any concerns and arguments - not statements - against it.
Despite our personal issues that you began when we disagreed in a Covid matter, I believe you truly want what's best for Hive in general terms, I just think your assessment of this proposal is incorrect and driven by personal issues, so I hope you reconsider your stance here.
That's it, that's the reply he muted
As a sidenote, I want to encourage everyone on Hive to get involved in the DHF - The Hive Governance protocol.
Getting involved helps Hive remain healthy and decentralized, so no matter what your stance is on any of the proposals, get involved!
Lastly, if you scroll all the way down on Peakd, or to the middle on Ecency, you will find the Leo proposal. If you like it, give it a vote!
Pretty modest marketing budget seeing as it spans over a year, is dripped in daily, and has no stated geographical bounds.
As a marketer, it always pains me to encounter the revulsion so many folks on Hive seem to have about it. Yet it is the key missing piece of the puzzle when it comes to growing this damn chain, lol.
Very glad that a reputable project-ecosystem like LF is taking a bold (for Hive) approach to marketing supported growth. Anyone with a stake in this place would be silly to not support this IMO.
Does anyone have the contact details of administrator Blurt? Maybe he wants someone with Azircon decentralized talents like silencing contrary ideas.
Leofinance is what brought me back to the Hive community with the Adoption Campaign which in this case was the best event proposed to join Web 3 + Web 2. Not Splinterlands besides being a curation farm and exchange of favorable votes to the curators has a share with more than 1M Views on Twitter? Is he talking about money in a slush fund?
Anyone know how to promote a post on peakd, i've looked but maybe not hard enough?
Just promoted on ecency for a week.
#feedback
Man it's such a pain not being able to vote on comments (sometimes) on leofinance. Have to keep switching dapps to do so!
Peakd doesn't have that
Really? i'm sure it used to be possible. Perhaps they have removed that option.
Do you know the team members? i never get a response when i mention @peakd
Very detailed, concise and compelling. I can see numerous funded proposals that should not be, because they bring no actual value to Hive, but this one has the potential to.
All venture require marketing to grow and the lack of it is the reason Hive is actually shrinking. To deny marketing, especially when it's spelled out well enough how the funds will be allocated is just nonsense.
On top of that @khaleelkazi says he'll pay it back if it fails, which is unheard of for any other DHF proposal. So it's a no lose proposition.
I say the Return Proposal 0 is most certainly too low, so support it, but when you do, support LeoFinances Marketing Proposal as well.
I think DBuzz's Proposal to Open Source their code that was already written is ripping us off and is an abuse of the DHF. Unfund that one.
Appreciate you, your support and vote of confidence.
We're going to make this happen. It's good for LEO and great for Hive. Time to grow rather than shrink and if some people (like the user in question) want things to remain the status quo so he can try and maintain a grasp on his measly power, we will succeed without their support and even in spite of their constant smear campaigns.
LeoFinance has always wanted Hive to grow its userbase and to grow in market cap as well. This is what makes us the #1 community on this chain by size and also what makes us so dangerous in the eyes of people like this user - they want things to remain small and the status quo so they can hold their power over rewards and other mechanisms on chain. They don't want more users and they don't want Hive to grow.
We'll make Hive grow regardless. Thanks for your support @solcycler !!
You are welcome
My thought on this is that offering to pay it back if the initiative fails speaks highly of your ethics.
But marketing is always a case of experimenting until you get the mix just right.
So although I fully support this proposal (especially the simplified onboarding and follow-up user education aspects) and think it'll succeed, in the event that it does fail I would rather not see the cost repaid, I'd rather see that amount cycled back into the next experiment.
What matters is results. I think Hive needs a lot more users to become relevant. It cannot just stay as our little club as that will not pay for significant new projects. There should be options for all.
Let's see what you can do.
Thanks for this comment, we definitely need more users. The past 15 days have been draining, and the marketing hasn't even begun lol. It will be a gigantic task, but we have the plans and we have the drive, and we will do our best to deliver and if able, over deliver.
Let's see what we can do, we'll do our best to pay back the trust the community is giving us - even though we are still around 5% below from getting funded xD
10% seems like a lot for one proposal. I don't necessarily disagree that 10% for advertising is worthwhile, but I would question if that whole 10% should be put into a single proposal. In the undecided column for now but I still have to go read it :)
I hope you make a decision, and if you have questions you can always ask here on chain or write me a DM on discord if you prefer so.
It would be a 10% of the current proposals approved, but it would also be 1.2% of the total available in the DHF. For a marketing proposal that lasts 1.5 years I'd say that it is pretty welcoming.
The number we have to look at here is the CAC, not the total amount of the proposal (it could be ten times bigger, and the CAC would remain at $25). Check the graphs above for more details.
Thanks for your feedback man!
It's not all going into a single marketing campaign. It's being split into multiple fronts as detailed in the proposal blog. You might want to read it.
Would it not be possible to change the proposal to a shorter implementation period? For example, 6 months instead of 16, reducing the value to around US$ 90,000? At the end of this 6-month period, the team can submit a new proposal.
I am in favor of short proposals (few months). If they really deliver what they promise, they can be voted on again as many times as necessary.
(This is the opinion of a beginner on Hive and goes for ALL proposals).
The amount of man hours to plan a campaign, and the amount of work that involves making a proposal (and passing it) is huge. Passing this proposal is taking a lot of time for the Leo team, time that could be used to either plan the marketing, grow the business, or simply improve the dapp.
Yes, it could be made for 6 months, but we decided to do it for 16 months and if after a considerable time the community is not satisfied with the results, they can simply just withdraw their vote from the proposal, but if they are satisfied, we don't have to campaign once more in six months (again, tons of man hours invested in just getting the proposal spread and getting the community to hear about it) and we can just continue working.
Thank you for your feedback, and as a beginner to Hive, welcome! If you haven't checked Threads, make sure to drop by, Threads are fun and very engaging, you won't regret it!
Can the community withdraw its vote on the proposal at any time if the results are not satisfactory?
Yes exactly, at any given time, if the community is not satisfied with the results, they can just remove the vote and the funds will stop coming.
Thank you. I had imagined that after approval there could be no changes.
Thank you @anomadsoul for sharing this and going into detail. Mad respect for going into length of addressing each and every point.
One thing I would like to ask is if there’s a study on retention rate? Say we’ve successfully onboarded 10k how many do you think would actually remain and be active users say in 6 months after 16 month campaign.
I would say that retained users equal about 1% or less of those you get to sign up. They are going for around 12000 monthly active users(retained users) by the end of next year, but the potential is even more. That being said, it's a cat and mouse chase.
yeah its quite a long way but I hope it works.
and here is my response
I will not answer any further comments.
The only thing here not addressed in the post is this one:
I have more than 100k HIVE, I would dox to you, but I don't trust you.
One of the foundations of Hive is to allow people to remain stake anon if they wish so.
And if I'm just an employee, something you've stated many times without even knowing the full story, why would my stake matter?
Good, don't answer, I don't need you to.
A mi esto tod es interesante...pero yo aun no he conseguido la ruta de la felicidad en HIVE!!...no logro sacar ganancia!!!! alguien con tips o tienen una ballenita encerrada???
Reading your own side of the story, says a lot about some hearsay, rumours, subtle mesaages I have been reading about Hive and Leo.
Though I am not on Leo, I love everhting about them
Congratulations @anomadsoul! You received a personal badge!
Thank you for participating in the Leo challenge.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
Check out our last posts:
Where's the proposal I'll vote
Making this type of noise is only appropriate for Plankton and Minnows. Once the account of a Hivian grows bigger into a Dolphin, then that noise should turn into a song. But when it grew into an Orca, that's the time to remain silent and be anonymous. This is just my opinion. The whale, of course, is expected to be the most humble of all fish creatures for only very few have the privilege to reach such a stage.