Would like to jump in to to make some comments in contrast to my apparently well timed post.
I would like to start by saying I generally support the direction of the initiative, and think it captures a good balance of experimentation at a lower risk due to the parties involved and structures suggested.
Some questions:
- Why is the investment using only DOT, rather than some or all in USDT?
- With $2,400,000, how many teams do you plan/predict to support?
- Given the experimental nature of the project, how long do you think it will take (let’s say from the approval of the treasury proposal) before you can evaluate the success of the initiative?
- What is Polimec’s cut of a successful funding round?
Some high level feedback:
If you had a chance to look at some of my responses as a result of my post about using Treasury as a VC, I stated that parachain teams should be providing value / access to their products for all DOT holders if the treasury will be used to fund them. I am not sure the treasury getting some of the parachain tokens quite captures that.
Do you agree with the sentiment about bringing value to all DOT holders as a minimum bar for receiving treasury funds? If so, perhaps you might have ideas on how you would establish that requirement in the funding process.
EDIT:
The PGI will participate with a maximum lockup period for the mainnet tokens at the time of launch to ensure long-term interest alignment. This means that the mainnet tokens will linearly unlock over a span of 52 weeks after the mainnet launch.
Also, this reads to me “the treasury will be at risk for holding the bag”.
What are the lockup periods for founders / other investors? “Long-term interest alignment”, to me, is when all parties are locked into the long term success of the product.
What might I be missing here?