Can you please explain why $10k a month is a good start, and particularly why 50% of that should go to influencers? The majority of influencers can’t deliver what they promise, and that is why the amount is smaller to test out various types of influencers and seek out those who are more strategically and performance-wise effective.
Standards:
Establish clear guidelines together with the Phi Labs contracted parties who are already carrying out such duties since Phi Labs should/have/must posses such kind of details when it comes to marketing and growth.
This include:
Develop comprehensive brand guidelines that outlines brand’s tone, voice, messaging, and style.
Create a checklist that outlines the key elements to review in each piece of content, such as grammar, accuracy, consistency, messaging alignment, and compliance with legal regulations.
Use a version control system to track changes and revisions, ensuring that everyone is working on the latest version.
Assign experienced editors to review content for grammar, spelling, punctuation, and overall clarity.
Review content to ensure compliance with relevant laws, regulations, and industry standards. (comes from Phi Labs)
Verifying that any claims or statements made in the content are accurate and substantiated. (comes from Phi Labs)
Learn from mistakes and successes to refine your content creation and review workflows.
Marketing and Growth DAO will be creating community accounts and be responsible for them, as well taking role of helping the dApp teams get more exposure.
We have proposed the metrics and also mentioned the first action plan already in the proposal. So far we’ve gotten no feedback over those, only general questions that are clarified in some points already. This proposal is going on-chain.
First and foremost – I want to say I think the Marketing DAO is a great idea. I’m in favor of it! And thank you for pushing this effort forward.
But of course, there first needs to be an actual DAO with established mission and goals, members with roles and responsibilities, and organizational success metrics. Once established, there can be a proposal that is focused on tangible initiatives with measurable outcomes. I’m confused why the response to my message doesn’t address these: DAO structure, members, individual roles and responsibilities, and organizational success metrics. The original proposal post addresses 5 DAO objectives but lacks the other elements.
Similarly, an organization does not receive grant funding before establishing organizational structure, members with roles, mission and objectives, a roadmap, and success metrics. This is a well established precedent in both the nonprofit and private sectors.
When you mention we - who does that comprise of? Who are the contributing members of the DAO, what are their roles and responsibilities, and what are successful outcomes for each role? In the original post, the only reference to members is the BonusBlock engagement protocol team.
When members and roles are not clear, it is not possible to move forward with a proposal and distribute funds to a DAO that is not established.
Where should be funds distributed – and to whom – when the Marketing DAO itself is not established?
10K a month is an arbitrary number. The point is that 40K for two months is a really high ask when the DAO itself hasn’t been established, and stating that 35K would go to members of the DAO when there currently are none is quite vague. I suggest the DAO be established, the members voted in, and then a spend is requested for the actions the DAO will take.
I think there are still a lot of things to be figured out before it goes on chain. There has been feedback that hasn’t been addressed and wrapped up together in the original proposal. To ensure it passes and the DAO is created in a constructive way, i would wait until we achieve consensus on the forum.
IMO the proposal is not ready to go on-chain. We still need to make sure we align with the form, the core functionalities of the DAO, whether it’s for DApps or Archway itself, and the way the DAO will spend those funds. Granting 40K for two months is a bit high for the kick-off, especially when we see that 87.5% of the funds go to human resources within the DAO.
I suggest establishing the DAO, voting in the members, and then having the conversation about the asked funds.
Bringing more attention to this post that goes over some numbers and metrics.
A lot of focus is being on who, and how many people. I don’t think that matters… if 20 people want to actively contribute, then great! It reads as open and accessible to me!
Appreciate the well-crafted proposal and ensuing discussion! On the whole, I’m personally supportive of it.
I do agree with some of the feedback around it being a sizable scope for a relatively short period. Assuming it’ll take some time to get the DAO up and running — i.e., solidifying specifics of the structure, onboarding members, operationalizing, etc. Let’s prep to ensure a smooth kick off and allow members to focus on core activities (rather than admin and setup)
Nevertheless, I see this as a valuable experiment and worth bringing to life!
This is a well thought out proposal and I agree that we should support more community to bring on chain results.
A few things come to mind before taking a big step like this.
We need to do a lot with a small financial request (aka run lean, get real results, don’t run out of $)
DAO solidified would help clarify admin specifics
Keep to a few campaigns, highly targeted and not just throwing money around to call it marketing.
(Too many chains do this and run out of money aka spend faster than there is demand for tokens.)
I’m biased and would like to see a direct sales outreach campaign (recruit 2 devs to build product on chain, cold outreach campaign and get 1,000 wallet downloads, etc) = These are direct wins that can’t be argued if money was well spent or not
I’m not saying that this wasn’t covered in the original proposal. I’m just sharing my thoughts
As we have talked before, this is a great Idea! Nevertheless, I’m aligned with some of the comments above. Let’s start testing the interest of the community in joining the DAO, set up some activities and responsibilities, maybe even to have some concrete plans or initiatives we could point at.
Then let’s talk about the budget we would need to make it happen.
So you insist on committing already used time from different community members to do more of the “free time” until we satisfy 100% of all the opinions in the forum? By then, the members would be discouraged from continuing anything.
The edited proposal will include the 2-3 week set-up period, which won’t be incentivized, and then funds will be given to the Foundation for distribution. This way, everyone agrees and votes for the DAO to be there, and then it is up to the members and interested people to join the DAO until any work compensation is given out, having controlling mechanism in place.
I have to congratulate @MrFreeman for such a great proposal, it’s highly comprehensive and addresses crucial topics that need to be focused on, also appreciate some very valuable feedback from the rest of the community.
I would only add the below observations that could be taken into account for the edited proposal.
Clearer KPIs: While the proposal mentions several KPIs, it might be beneficial to define specific numerical targets for each KPI. For instance, instead of just mentioning “minimum 30 DAU growth,” provide a specific percentage increase or a target number of new daily active users. Clear and measurable KPIs will help in assessing the effectiveness of the DAO’s efforts more accurately.
Inclusion of a Risk Management Strategy: The proposal outlines various strategies and initiatives, but it could benefit from a section dedicated to risk management. This could involve identifying potential risks associated with the proposed activities and strategies, as well as outlining contingency plans or mitigation measures. Addressing potential challenges proactively can help ensure smoother execution.
Emphasis on Engagement Quality: While the proposal covers engagement with social media platforms and influencers, it could be improved by stressing the importance of high-quality engagement. Focusing on building genuine relationships and delivering valuable content will likely yield better results compared to a high volume of shallow interactions.
