Kus Public Broadcasting Extension & Marketing Bounty Engagement

Isn't this technically marketing? Surely it should be in the marketing bounty if it is.

If not, do The Kusamarian actually generate any revenue or is this just an ongoing part of paying for a podcaster to do shows about polkadot?

What has the The Kusamarian revenue been for the last 4 quarters?

Voting NAY here with 10 DOT symbolically, as I find the interviewee selection by the Kus rather biased. Conducting no less than 4 long format interviews with one Polkadot ecosystem fund (Scytale) and zero with the other (Harbour Industrial Capital) is hardly balanced reporting. Having said that, I personally still hope this referendum passes, as I consider the Kus a valuable media asset for Polkadot. My 10 DOT NAY vote is a just gentle reminder to distribute airtime more equally amongst competing projects within the ecosystem.

Hello and thank you Kus team for the proposal.
With the passing of referendum 1166, Marketing Bounty 2.0 https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1166, all marketing and outreach referenda must be proposed to the Marketing Bounty as approving additional marekting and referenda will increase that 10% treasury income significantly.
Our recommendation is for all marketing and outreach referenda to be submitted the Marketing Bounty exclusively.
While we agree with the split and that two components of this referendum: AAG and the OpenDev call are core components of the operations of Polkadot as a network that cannot be categorized as marketing or outreach, we believe that the rest of the operations should be funded by the Marketing Bounty due to the abovementioned reasons.

For those saying this must go through the recently relaunched Marketing Bounty, I would argue that The Kus isn’t marketing - at least that’s not its primarily function. If we start claiming that news = marketing, we can basically declare the end of journalism.

Helping make more informed network participants shares little with the motivations of marketing. To be clear, I’m not against marketing, but the distinction is worth making. If we also fund good marketing and more people show up to participate in our ecosystem, the various programs produced by The Kus will help continue to keep people present and informed. This is in part why I'm in favour of the Marketing Bounty working in a more coordinated way with The Kus in future.

Regardless, it is worth asking, what are the risks if The Kus is no longer funded? What would OpenGov be like without AAG? How many groups of Web3 developers have open public meetings? Would you really be able to keep up with the fast pace of change, new ideas and new opportunities across Polkadot without a team of people delivering well-researched and efficiently communicated regular news updates? The amount of non-hype educational content in the Space Monkeys back catalogue of interviews is second to none in crypto media - do you really want this to stop?

-PJS

Note: I've delegated my vote to KusDAO in which I'm an active participant. It appears KusDAO is abstaining in this referendum to avoid any perception of a conflict of interest, even though nearly all of KusDAO is not on the payroll of The Kus. In fact, you are welcome to join KusDAO via Discord.

Stepping away from the details of the proposal, I’m disappointed by how The Kusamarian responds to legitimate comments and concerns. Dismissing someone as a troll for asking relatively simple questions, while sidestepping the questions entirely, is counterproductive and undermines efforts to build credibility and secure support for further funding.

Correct, I could vote, but realistically, my vote would be just a drop in the ocean compared to the influence wielded by the inner circle behind this proposal. ChaosDAO, Lucky Friday, and KusDAO should abstain from voting on this proposal due to clear conflicts of interest:

• Lucky Friday: Phunky, a key figure within Lucky Friday, has significant influence there. At the same time, he is a regular host on AAG.

• ChaosDAO: Leemo and Ben (lolmcshizz) are prominent members and both are also regular hosts on AAG. Crane, also a loud ChaosDAO member and part of TheKusamarian. Additionally, Phunky and Jay are members of ChaosDAO, to my knowledge.

• KusDAO: While KusDAO may not be directly associated with The Kusamarian, it is evident that its members are likely to support this proposal, introducing another layer of bias.

To further underscore the issue, all the individuals mentioned above are part of ChaosDAO, making the overlap of influence in this ecosystem concerning. These connections suggest a lack of impartiality and underline why abstaining from voting is necessary for fairness and transparency.

Again, you shouldn't be entitled to an extension 6 months in advance.

Adding responses to two common questions we're getting in DMs...

Q: Why is the Kus funded only through OpenGov?

A: It's not! We are always delivering much more than we are contracted to without extra funding!

Here is an incomplete list of some of what of that service in the last year-ish:

• Over delivered Ref 85 (26 weeks) by 12 weeks (46%)
• Hong Kong PBA 2024 coverage including: Student pitches 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11; JAM first impressions with Shawn Tabrizi; & PBA Promo. We've provided in-person coverage of most PBAs.
• The Monthly OpenDev Platform was done without funding for the first 7 months.
• Conor Daly Indy500 Asset Loss Aversion campaign to raise $1.3M + Car Reveal
• We helped with Polkadot Account Videos without extra pay (1, 2, 3)
• Polkadot Pulse Treasury funded event emergency MC (Did not Accept Pay).
• Hosted Decoded Main Stage
• Extra Decoded Coverage
• Extra coverage of Conor Daly
• Extra coverage of Inter Miami
• Hosting 2 stages of Sub0
• Extra Coverage of Sub0 (Instead of pocketing the hosting fees we used them to fly out 2 more members of the team for the vast coverage)
• Added an extra stop to the Gray Paper Tour
• Created this Academic Resource for teams implementing the Gray Paper including editing and web dev.
• The preparation and hosting of every AAG is without funding
• Upcoming TOP SECRET collab
• We are under contract to deliver 100% of Ref. 668 with only 69% of the funds.

With all this service done without treasury funds, it is hard to imagine how the Kus is 100% treasury funded!

Q: Is the Kus a Monopoly?

A: No but we do work hard to provide tokenholders the very best service for the funding we receive. The fact is this ecosystem is TOO SMALL to have competition. The goal is collaboration and getting more people involved in the task of sharing the story of Polkadot.

Some have suggested that funding the Kus means other media is not funded. In practice this is not true with LOTs of other media brands funded - often with Kus support - and they will continue to be funded under the Marketing Bounty!

Here are some things I've led and achieved with others to get people involved and decentralize authority:

• Built WagMedia for low-friction incentives for content creators before any funding was requested for what became the Kus
• WagMedia has funded hundreds of content creators - many now full time in the eco and who have received their own treasury funds
• Handed WagMedia control over to council who is doing wonders with it today
• Assisted 2 attempts so far to fork AAG (We need more of them in other timezones!)
• Built KusDAO to direct Kus voting stack
• Got DV delegation and then gave it to KusDAO
• Encouraging the "take over" of KusDAO by its members
• Actively guiding other media makers to Marketing Bounty

The scarce resource in our ecosystem is Talent, not funding. Defunding The Kus will not make more talent appear.

Thank you for reading these two new FAQs!

Dear @The Kusamarian,

Thank you for your proposal. Our vote on this proposal is AYE. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

The DAO members unanimously supported the referenda, recognizing The Kusamarian's significant contribution to the ecosystem, particularly in PR and information dissemination. While the transparency in budgeting for May-December 2024 was praised, some members expressed concerns about the timing of the top-up request, given the remaining period funded by Ref. 668. They recommended considering future funding through the Marketing Bounty to align with ongoing ecosystem developments. Overall, the referendum was deemed necessary and valuable for the ecosystem's success.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Kind regards,

Permanence DAO

Very cool and transparent voting system - Thanks Permanence DAO!