I’m not gonna talk about me here as I’ve already explained many things and it appears no one wants to hear it, they just want to be outraged.
As far as Dapplr, I’m currently voting for the proposal but there are a few things that are concerning and I believe is why it’s not being supported, yet, by many larger stakeholders.
The most important one though is -
There is no product.
That’s right, there is no app. There is an idea for an app, which they are showing you. There are some visuals to show what it “may” look like, but there is nothing actually delivered at this time.
Not many want to fund an “idea” that may or may not be delivered and may or may not be open sourced. The answer that “some” aspects may be open sourced doesn’t really ease people’s minds.
You will notice other projects that aren’t being funded and generally it comes down to stake holders not wanting to fund closed source projects through the fund, I’m sure there are exceptions to this but that’s the general feedback I hear.
Many believe there should be something to actually fund before funding is received. Currently there is literally nothing to see or try and therefore I think some are wary.
Unknown devs
You may not like this answer but this is a social chain and therefore social aspects play a part. This team is unknown, and while that doesn’t matter much, they also have no “background” to show that even though they are unknown to Hive, they are a qualified team.
Now, I’m not saying they aren’t, I’m just saying it’s way easier to vote to fund something based on an “idea” from a team that is well known and has a positive track record of delivering. Without that, it makes funding a product that does not exist yet even more challenging.
The accounts all seem to be linked to one another as well, and again, on its own that’s not an issue, but personally it’s something I took note of.
So while personally believe for the amount asking, it may be worth the slight risks I’ve mentioned about I don’t blame anyone for thinking otherwise.
I think the general consensus is “let them build something first”; and I don’t think that’s that insane of a request in the slightest.
I wish individuals would perhaps attempt to view things things in a logical fashion rather than trying to turn absolutely everything into a “us vs. them” narrative.. it’s getting old, and it’s not productive.
Hi @justineh
There is no product - Your concern is completely understandable and we are working very hard to launch our product as soon as possible.
Unknown devs - We have been a part of the community since the STEEM blockchain launch (more than 3.5 years, not so active though) and our team knows all the ins and outs of the chain. Regarding the competency of the team, all of the devs and our designer have worked on world class products.
We don't have any issues if the funding doesn't get supported. We just want the whole #hive ecosystem to be better.
In addition, if the community has only these concerns, we will try to be more active and please let us know about any other concerns, if any.
I hope you take the feedback as it was intended.
Also, what world class products?
I find it interesting that you had one proposal where you stated you would open source some aspects and before even having a product you are now asking for a second proposal for a much higher amount.. in order to open source?
And your three person team has what experience? I’d love to hear more about these world class products, could help get more support.
Not entirely sure how I feel about supporting either proposal now and will be removing my vote until I have more information.
We would have shared the products list but as per team member's NDA agreement, Product list is highly confidential.
Our first proposal was primarily for managing the infrastructure costs and we are still looking forward to open sourcing some of the plugins which will help developers to build mobile applications.
Our new proposal specifically includes open sourcing of the entire Dapplr product which includes Front-end (Android and iOS) and Back-end code.
We are not too far from our beta release and we believe it will really help to boost the community belief in us.
It's your decision to support or not, we would be happy if you make this call once the product is launched.
I get your concerns but if we all think in such a paranoid way, we will never fund anything of substance other than witness proposals and those from OG's who've been popular around the block for quite some time, which is definitely not what the DAO was intended for.
How do you reckon we should encourage devs from the outside of our little bubble to come here to develop something on Hive when all we fund are witnesses reputable users who've been here since the beginning?
Also, yo say there is no product yet, only an idea.
DAO's purpose is to fund projects beneficial to our blockchain.
How do we help devs do their thing if we will only fund their projects after the product itself has already been finished?
Do investors really look to only support projects that are already finished?
That's rather counter-intuitive and doesn't make sense to me.
Yes. Minimum Viable Product called MVP.
Explains why you're deluded into thinking you were making sense.
You are the one not making sense here and I don't appreciate you twisting my words into the shape which fits you the best.
I have clearly said:
FINISHED PRODUCT != MVP
MVP != FINISHED PRODUCT
Is this clear enough for your small mind to comprehend?
Being a halfwit with a clearly retarded name, using such degenerated logic and by leaving such a downright moronic comment "explains why you're deluded into thinking you were making sense."
There is nothing counter-intuitive with the points I made above, they are actually quite logical and there are plenty of examples of it happening, it’s not just this one project.
Imo if devs want to see their project funded they should make a very clear effort for their product to be understood and people to see the value. I believe the current example is showing this project has not achieved that yet. Doesn’t mean it’s not possible, it means they haven’t done so.
Minimum viable products are pretty standard in the industry.
For a DAO, yes there needs to be something to show as a reason to fund.. more than just an “idea”.. generally when there is only an idea and nothing has been delivered, there must be more of an effort to gather funding, generally in a private way.
As I said, I was voting the proposal.. until their most recent actions, and was simply trying to give some insight on the reasoning.. that had nothing to with “us vs. them” narrative.
To add on to this convo, I think a big part of the problem is that most whales on the platform (whom votes you need to really get your product above the return proposal) are super busy working on their own projects or on the chain. This is great, but it means it might be harder to get them to take a look into your product, definitely if it's not in niche that speaks to them and /or you don't know them. Just want to say that building a great MVP and being a known dev often isn't enough. I've been in the community for a long time with Pinmapple (previously known as Steemitworldmap) and like to think I have a reputable name. I have also built an MVP for Haveyoubeenhere (which was showcased on Steemfest in Thailand). After that, without my proposal being funded by the DAO, I kept working away and improving the app. Now it's in a pretty good spot going by feedback I've received from users. As a small note for myself, I would say that for me I could have probably spend more time writing update posts, but those take a fair amount of time that could be spend developing the app instead! 😄
Either way, just my 2 cents! For those who stumbled upon this comment and are curious to see what this Haveyoubeenhere app is all about, here is some info:
I am also always looking for feedback from the community to see how I can improve this baby even more, so definitely feel free to get in touch with me! 😄