I would personally welcome completely phasing out all expenditure on Venezuela and Africa. These regions dont have access to markets, infrastructure, investors, none of it. These regions are even seen as high risk for investors so much so that having a dominance of users from those regions could have a further negative effect on perception.
That being said, some people commenting here have unreasonable expectations, some of it due to self-imposed limitations VP put on itself structure wise. Those limitations existing due to wanting to maintain "decentralization". I hate those limitations, I think they suck but theres nothing that can be done about it unless theres consensus.
I have always advocated for a more structured approach going as far as having a community VC or at least having a foundation.
VP is reactive, its not proactive. Its based around funding requests, not strategy development.
Why?
Easy to answer. No one wants anyone to have any decision making power which creating a succinct strategy would require. Even having a carrot and a stick. Seeing the general sentiment towards VP here I can only imagine what would happen to the people with decision making power. They would probably be strung up from a tree after a week.
That being said... The overall expense is extremely minor and doesnt really affect Hive in any way financially speaking. 250k is chump change in the crypto ecosystem even when taking sub 5-10mil MC projects. Even if we consider overall expenditure.
But yeah... id really like to cut some of this stuff.