Pretty much what was expected. Even when it was working it was just giving out tiny 1 Hive tips to existing Hive users. Did zero for onboarding and mostly just gave Hive to people who are already on board.
Just because he spent $60K-70K+ out of pocket doesn’t mean it is worth that much nor that we should have paid for it.
The 2,000 HBD/day allowed them to get paid fast with little time for anyone to see if it was actually doing anything. With the elevated HBD price for most of the proposal they made a lot more than the $73,000.
Do they actually have to provide accounts and proof that the money was spent on exactly what it was approved to be spent on? Surely there must be checks in place as per the proposals?
As marky said, the amount of money was based around the time the contract developer (@lightproject) spent developing it. Whether it was developed effectively or not, no-one outside can asses because the code is closed-source, only the development results per day are known.
But as it should be pretty clear by now: time spent developing the project !== value generated by the project
If the price would have been based around the value it provides, it would have been FAR less if you compare the actual results, not the potential results somewhere in the future.
Basically, in my opinion, jackmiller should have never paid lightproject before any results were known and lightproject should have never requested such high payments without known results via proof-of-concept and the community should have decided whether it would be worth it to continue working on it.
Because at this point, Hive and its reputation are on the losing end for giving money naively to a project without PoC, not jackmiller who miscalculated the impact the project would have but still got a full refund for what he paid - and it's not some "pocketchange" which could justify an "oops, sorry - I'm out".
If this is the message we want Hive to bring outside to the world aka. "come to hive, pitch some crazy idea, develop some version of a product, sack in the money, never take responsibility for what happens next" then I doubt legitimate people/projects will have an incentive to put their reputation on the line building here.
Thanks for explaining that to me. And no word from either account on the current situation and the community is out of pocket.
I know it would go against all the principles of DPoS but Is there no way to give smaller accounts / stakeholders a bigger voice in the funding process? Does the word 'stake' only apply in a financial sense?
wait, this bullshit got funded?
No. There were milestones that I am aware of, just reimbursement for money spent developing it.
Hive tips = waste of money.
60k - 70k in marketing and to standard onboarding process would bring much much more value.
even if Hive would pay fees like ugly newsletter sign-ups + first purchase ( around 5$ per user) it would bring close to 10k users to hive.
With and standard onboarding process like free wallet needs social media account + email would be able to remember the people.
like" we miss you" or something gay to trigger them active again :)
I'm in favour of hire fast, fire fast, but it needs a concept that proofs value.