Fine-tuned and Dedicated Onboarding Strategy into Polkadot

Dear Proposer,

Thank you for your proposal. Our vote on this proposal is NAY.

The Big Spender track requires 60% quorum according to our voting policy. This proposal has received zero aye and eight nay votes from ten members, with one member abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

The referendum saw a unanimous rejection from voters regarding a proposed esports sponsorship, primarily due to the request for DOT funding instead of stablecoins. While some acknowledged the proposal’s thoughtful preparation and potential market reach, concerns were raised about the project's relevance given Polkadot's current absence in the gaming space. A few voters suggested that sponsorships in esports might only prove fruitful when the platform is actively engaged, indicating that more strategic approaches should be considered in the future. Some voters expressed interest in further discussion but ultimately leaned towards skepticism.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO

Please make sure to prepare in advance a coordinated plan with the Polkadot community that ensures a significant integration with the technology and its people and not only a brand awareness campaign that may or may not lead to a limited use of it.
For now our vote will be NAY to all new e-sports sponsorships as we have already one active e-sports sponsorshop campaign and another 3.7M competing e-sports proposal.

Hi,
Please think about the people reading the description:
Can you add at the begginning of the proposal description:

• the duration (from when to when)
• any point of contacts
• the requested amount (i know it's displayed on dapps but it's more clear if present in the description).

Also, why are you asking DOT and not stablecoins ?
Thx in advance

As a personal feedback, please remove your event proposal to throw ballons in the air.
We are living in the 21th century, we are in 2025.

I live in France, so sorry to learn you that plactics are polluting our planet for 100 to 500y. I don't want you to pollute the countryside with plastic ballons.
it's like throwing plastic bottles in the ocean, would you do that? No.

I'm also part of Surfrider Foundation since 25 years, it's definitely the type of event that no association protecting the environment, especially water and ocean, want to see.

Please think about something not belonging to the 20th century and keep preserving our beautiful planet.
Thx in advance.

A a final message towards the strong words from DonDiegoSanchez.
Let’s dissect the two main issues with this claim without retorting to confrontation.

• So is this coordinated plan in the room with us?

Honestly, how do you expect the community to know about this undescribed coordinated plan related to this proposal. There is no mention of community like technical teams behind any new integration, the Marketing Bounty and Fellowship according to TheMoonBearer on X as well https://x.com/TheMoonBearer/status/1882743547062796361 when there is no written information in this referendum text and slides. Technical integrations are undescribed other than NFT collections in Nova, something that hasn’t worked out as as well as a conversion funnel even for prior expensive technical integration like F1/Tezos/McLaren we must add. All that can be analyzed from the current information is the reach that the G2 sponsorship will have, through social media, visualizations and Nova wallet downloads. Many of which will be reverted back to Polkadot users as we have seen also with other referenda in the past.

So let’s stop these “if-you-know-you-know” kind of comments also shared by MoonBearer on X if you really want to put blame/responsability on other entities who are analyzing the proposal, at the very least, let’s include the information that you are claiming to be included already. As we have already mentioned on other referenda. If there is private information about it, don’t expect the ones without this information to trust and support blindly your proposal. For now, this is a sponsorship with enhanced viewership and unclear plans to execute any new technical integrations or community integrations. We have seen this fail in the past so this should be defined as a risk that voters should be willing to take.

• Plans to deploy an even more ambitious strategy than before.

We have already a sponsorship in the e-sports arena with Heroic in the exact same geography and category. So there is already a precedent that’s worth analyzing. So it’s a judgment of this precedent that makes us NAY this proposal too. At the end of the day, having two (and potentially 3) e-sports sponsorships in the same geography sounds like putting too many resources in one basket. Specially when one of the sponsorships needs more work (actually both active sponsorships need more work). Therefore, adding 3.2M in value for yet another e-wports sponsorship is not a risk worth taking based on prior results and the low DOT price which is directly affected by the token sale.

With that we must finish with saying that this vote will remain final without recourse for further comment.

Amount requested: 495,030.0 DOT

This should be a joke. isn`t?

Clear and loud NAY.

Only 5% for fees? If you really mean it, you should put more faith into the ecosystem and really integrate with it ground up. Show us you are in it for the long haul. Integrate with bounties, help us improve funding opportunities to fit esports. Proof yourself first, then we can talk. Reputation is everything in web3.

That said, I highly encourage all esports proposals as there is a lot of opportunity for both sides, especially this year.