I will only respond on behalf of Código Brazuca, since the other matters are not within my knowledge.
Regarding our receiving 67,000 instead of the original 95,000: you claim to be so connected to the ecosystem—did you follow the DOT price fluctuation at the time we submitted our proposal and when we actually got paid? There was a devaluation, and during that period it wasn’t yet possible to receive payment in USDT, which explains the difference. You didn’t catch that, did you?
As for the final balance of US$ 55,000, that was the price we paid by choosing not to convert in the hope that the token would return to its original value. Our mistake—life goes on. The course continues to be delivered, even at our own financial loss. Along the way, it had to be updated and several classes had to be re‑recorded. We even paid taxes on what we received, because as a Brazilian company we have accounting obligations to the tax authorities, as well as to our instructors and for our operations. That is called ethics and transparency.
Another matter is a transfer to our account made by John Rhodell. We needed to settle commitments for our course operations, and John helped us by loaning the amount. Here is the transaction: https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/21373022-2
And all people can see some screenshots about it here, in the my last reply of this post - https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/3066
Concerning your claim that nothing was delivered, I think your comment is made in bad faith or shows a lack of understanding of what is going on. However, you can clarify your doubt by asking a student you referred—he is taking the course and is now about to be hired by a blockchain that supports Polkadot. There are others on the same path. Once again, this shows that you are either lost in your assertions or perhaps influenced by third parties frustrated that they don’t have our expertise and methodology in their own projects.
With respect to measuring results, the course is not over yet, but don’t worry—I’ll share one piece of data with you: people are already employed in various fields, including blockchain, both in Brazil and abroad. The student you referred is one of them. In fact, before finishing the course, they were already hired.
In my opinion, regarding your concern about technical evaluation, my best gauge is the job offers being made and the projects being conceived by the students. I even hope that Polkadot will take an interest in them. Our course was designed to train developers but with the goal of providing a professional opportunity to those who didn’t have one. It’s not charity—it’s about bringing technology access to people and changing their lives.
And to be perfectly clear: if you think we’re not providing follow‑up, we do care about that. We’re sending updates to the Web3 Foundation and keeping them informed about what we’re doing and the course’s progress.
Now, don’t worry! At the end we’ll produce a report (I guess you haven’t seen our previous ones, right?), detailing what we’ve done on this journey and how we can help Polkadot improve other educational proposals. We’re thinking of the Polkadot community, the Web3 Foundation itself, our partners, and our students—and we will share all of it. Our idea is that this could become a document—perhaps a foundational guide—so that other projects can learn from our lessons. (Don’t worry: you and your friends will have access, and it will be public; maybe your proposals that didn’t pass will succeed. Think of this as open‑source, collaborative consulting.)
I know that you and others (sometimes on our side) are upset about not being with us, building something real. But everyone chooses their own path, right?
As for us, it’s at least four years working here in Brazil with web projects—actually delivering results, unlike many who only talk.
Anyway, this is my last post, because wasting time with frustrated people seeking their minute of fame is exhausting…
That is truly unacceptable.