# Visibility Initiative for Funded Projects **URL:** \ **Category:** Governance\ **Created:** [October 25, 2024, 8:59am UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/visibility-initiative-for-funded-projects/10604 "2024-10-25T08:59:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![kianenigma](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/kianenigma/32/6153_2.png) [@kianenigma](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/kianenigma)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2024, 4:29pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/visibility-initiative-for-funded-projects/10604/21 "2024-12-10T16:29:58Z")
The overall initiative is great, we always love to see more codebases, projects and such be branded as “ By Polkadot”. As to what `` should be, I think different opinions are valuable in their own context, and I am optimistic that the diverse comments here will help us come to a good conclusion. Regardless of that conclusion though, I think “ By Polkadot” is already a great step forward, and much better than team building in the Polkadot tech stack without any mention of it. So I hope acknowledging this helps us converge to a decision sooner rather than later. As to my personal “opinion”, If we are talking about anything that is technologically linked to the Polkadot relay chain, be it a Parachain, a DApp on a parachain, a (meme)coin on a DApp on Parachain and so on, I would stick to a simple “ **Secured by Polkadot** ”. If it is a purely research, non-profit, non-parachain-based project (prototyping a new blockchain type with Polkadot-SDK), then “ **Funded by Polkadot** ”. ---
**Author:** ![somedude](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/somedude/32/7263_2.png) [@somedude](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/somedude)\ **Post date:** [December 10, 2024, 5:17pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/visibility-initiative-for-funded-projects/10604/22 "2024-12-10T17:17:51Z")
> [@DotDotApe](#): > > There has been the idea of changing Substrate’s open-source license to enforce any “Secured by Polkadot” logo. Wow, nagware! Or perhaps [adware](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareware#Adware): > The term is sometimes used to refer to software that displays unwanted advertisements. If the objective was to create a lot of resentment with a minimal budget, I’d love this idea. ---
**Author:** ![BRA16dott](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/bra16dott/32/5002_2.png) [@BRA16dott](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/BRA16dott)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2024, 8:35pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/visibility-initiative-for-funded-projects/10604/23 "2024-12-12T20:35:17Z")
good rabbit ---
**Author:** ![syed](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/syed/32/7438_2.png) [@syed](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/syed)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2025, 5:53pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/visibility-initiative-for-funded-projects/10604/24 "2025-01-14T17:53:25Z")
Agree with this sentiment, and the general consensus here that there should be a few different phrases “[Secured/Powered/Funded] by Polkadot” If on a website, I’d probably also go so far as suggesting that the phrase should be linked back to the page on PolkAssembly [to serve as a quick reminder for community members on the amount / terms of the funding] I don’t think gov should enforce how this credit is shown on a app/website/UI. We should: - Have a list of “approved” phrases for credit, OR have a set of graphics people can use - Suggest that these should be linked to somewhere - Suggest the credit (text or image) should be placed on website-wide footer (so it’s on all pages on their website/app) - etc etc i.e. we shouldn’t be proscriptive IMO, but rather encouraging. A key sell for the project to include the credit is to show that “look, we are trusted, even buy polkadot governance…so much, that they even put money behind us”. I think its an easy sell. [Previous page](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/visibility-initiative-for-funded-projects/10604.md?page=1)