Hey Chase! Thank you for chiming in so quickly. A lot of these are really good questions but I’m going to try to batch them since many of them are along the same themes.
I don’t get what you mean. This is my+Nate’s vision for Polkadot. It isn’t coming from the Moonbeam team or really meant to benefit Moonbeam other than the “rising tide lifts all boats” thing. We, like many builders, have very acutely felt the struggle of the anti-Polkadot sentiment from the entire crypto ecosystem and we really want to help fix it.
The point we’re trying to make here is that, unless someone volunteers to help point the marketing collaborative (referring to many teams here) in the “right” direction, it’ll probably end up being a jumbled amalgamation of individuals who all want to contribute but don’t necessarily see the bigger picture. I don’t see a world where that brings us a concise, compelling message and marketing.
My understanding of the centralization ethos is:
- No one party is in control, particularly of both building and growing the protocol (
since everyone is no longer under Parity), and - The contributions themselves are not all coming from one team (I can’t see a world where this is a risk TBH since we’re already seeing multiple proposals across BD, marketing, community, etc).
I caution against conflating “no one in control” with “no one has any vision for where we want to steer this thing.” I am hoping, in the role that we laid out here, that Distractive will be a key part of suggesting a direction for Polkadot and helping to work with other marketing contributors to get us there.
We started Distractive earlier this year as the Moonbeam contributing teams decentralized. I’ll be honest, it was a ton of work. We kicked off the process this time last year and launched Distractive about six months later, in May 2023. We’ve been operating with Moonbeam as our exclusive client to ensure everything was up to our standards before looking at other clients.
The time is right and we have the ability to take on new clients. This opportunity with Polkadot is an ideal fit, both in terms of timing and in terms of subject matter. We’re well positioned to chip in here.
Moonbeam is still a client, yes. We’re not still “at” Moonbeam in the sense that Moonbeam isn’t a company and never was. We’ll continue actively contributing to Moonbeam. That said, we’ve also been cycling in new marketing resources throughout the year so me+my team have bandwidth. This project will be my core focus.
This is going to require constant communication, coordination and LOTS of project management. We already run these kinds of initiatives across multiple teams in our capacity as ecosystem marketers, but this is going to be a much bigger challenge.
I don’t think there is any one party “deciding” this, which is kind of the point. My understanding is that the funding from the Web3 Foundation will be doled out by them, through a process much like any other grant. But contributing teams can also submit for Treasury funding. And I’m sure many other contributors will come through channels like the ambassador program or simply organic community participation. We’re not volunteering to choose them, just to help organize the chaos.
Was trying to avoid a 10,000 word manifesto 
. Some of this is going to have to wait until after the contributing teams are spun up/ready to go, since it’ll be collaborative. But the first, biggest undertakings for the first 3 months are going to be:
- Fix the message. STAT.
- Create an immediate action plan and ship some of the work that’s already been done (brand, website) with the new message. We need to cut it out with the 12mo-long projects.
- Start with something specific and impactful: create a targeted campaign to fix the bearish sentiment, starting with some of the most influential stakeholders (in my opinion, VCs who refuse to fund Polkadot projects).
Re: shifting to more democratic working groups… this is going to be organic. We can’t give you timelines. In my view, Distractive is going to provide a baseline of services and vision to keep things moving. But teams can and should continue to come up with their own ways to contribute and use the funding mechanisms that are already made available for Polkadot.
Again, a lot of this stuff is communication/organization 101 and isn’t going to be revolutionary. I plan to:
- Organize regular Town Halls to discuss SOLUTIONS (not just complain) for some of the issues we’re facing, particularly builders and ecosystem project teams. This will be a regular and ongoing communication channel.
- Host global marketing calls to sync and collaborate with the other marketing teams, where we are each sharing what we’re working on but also learning about the changes/evolution happening in each region.
- Post frequently here, on this forum, to test new messages and get ideas on some of the things we’re trying to achieve.
We already do all of these things, all the time! The goal is to have an execution layer (via Distractive) that can ensure some baseline of service while also leaving room for other teams to come in and contribute, particularly on specific projects. The hope is that we don’t ‘stop’ marketing between projects and as resources cycle in and out.
I’ve read a bunch of the posts discussing marketing on here and frankly, they make me grow in my convictions even more. I’m not sure which one you mean by “AMI Collective,” though, so I might not have read that. Do you mean Raul’s post? This one, and other ones I’ve read, all seem to focus on the administrative and organizational aspects of decentralization, which seem to involve a lot of logistics and overhead. I’m less worried about being in a “collective” and more worried about “what the hell are we trying to do and how can we fix this?” I don’t see a world where appointing a bunch of task masters, regardless of mechanisms, will fix the vision and missing gaps for Polkadot. But please send me whichever link to which you’re referring and I’ll make sure I read it!
We have been working with a bunch of other teams that will be putting in marketing proposals btw. Peter Mauric teased some of this with his post on his own BD collective. The Blokhaus team in particular would be a valuable contributor to the marketing efforts we’d like to undertake. I anticipate this funding from the Web3 Foundation will bring impactful new contributors into the fold.
I’m not sure that I agree on this one. Decentralization isn’t about being aimless. It also (I really, really hope) isn’t about making decisions by committee for every conceivable thing. We’d be paralyzed with bureaucracy if that was the case.
Distractive is proposing that we work with all the teams, define where we want to go (as a collective), and then vocally and consistently help shepard teams in that direction.
In my opinion, these community leaders will be self-selected. Who shows up to town halls? Who chimes in regularly with feedback in messaging groups? Who contributes and asks questions and suggests ideas?
Yes, totally agree here. And yes, agencies are more expensive! The most cost-effective model would certainly be a single in-house team.
My plan is to start working through all of these details in December with my team, the community, existing contributors who plan to stick around (and maybe even those who don’t). In particular, the audience focus and alignment is where I want to start. How are we talking about Polkadot to each of these groups, and what is the overarching message that’ll be consistent throughout?
It’ll be a lot of work to execute on everything I’ve laid out here, but we’re stepping up and we’re eager to take it on.