Decided to post this here as it feels like a better place to give visibility to this concept.
To be able to keep these workgroups true to the purpose, we need necessary amount of visibility into 2 things.
1-The roadmap, long term vision & key values of the protocole beyond what’s mentioned in medium articles & whitepaper. I am sure these were mapped before going to VC’s. What are the short & long term expected hurdles? Any contingency plan in order in case of unforseen regulatory action? Are there any promises to be aware of? Any specific opportunity the team saw initially? Any feature or development commitment locked in with VC’s?
All of the above will be needed to have informed desicions on the future of the protocole on all the WG’s mentioned above. We need to align on a roadmap and the roadmap goes thru all the above.
The tokenomics does not mention much beyond genesis, presale team & advisor fund distribution. Not much info is available regarding funds distribution for the operational health of the protocole. Such as Marketing, talent, partnerships. ETC. Some might be covered in VC funding, some may not… Dont know that part very well. Might also not need to know. All that will highly likely to impact how the PCV should be diversified, this should be made transparent (or transparent enough if there are other considerations) To give way to a better diversification & budgeting for all WG’s. Budgeting is the core of a diversification excercise. Maybe that WG should finish their initial work to give way to others?
For all the WG’s to act on the aligned long term goals of the protocole we need to be able to take “informed desicions” This information will be crucial especially before diversification of the PCV as that diversification will mean certain commitments that might be more expensive to turn back from.
Hope the above makes sense & have a great day/night whichever side of the pond you are