We want to open up the NEM community fund for applications soon. That that goal in mind, we created specific guidelines and the voting procedure:
[url=https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v12DKjHLShbacq4nGyQBm183ADoVgSEQNqbwUYWQBTM/edit]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v12DKjHLShbacq4nGyQBm183ADoVgSEQNqbwUYWQBTM/edit
[font=Verdana]This is a draft for public comment, so p[/font]lease comment and give feedback 
We want to open up the NEM community fund for applications soon. That that goal in mind, we created specific guidelines and the voting procedure:
[url=https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v12DKjHLShbacq4nGyQBm183ADoVgSEQNqbwUYWQBTM/edit]https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v12DKjHLShbacq4nGyQBm183ADoVgSEQNqbwUYWQBTM/edit
[font=Verdana]This is a draft for public comment, so p[/font]lease comment and give feedback
Good to see some progress here.
Will reply later! ;D
This is great NEWS we will be in touch Makoto
250 posts in this forum are a lot… only 12 users did so many.
Is it possible to know how many posts someone did in our thread on BTT?
250 posts is an aggregate for all the members involved, not required for one person. 
quote:
[font=roboto]Every shareholder and director shall have to reveal their names and identity in order to be eligible for funding. Each shareholder and director will have to prove their identity (example, driver
quote:
[font=roboto]Every shareholder and director shall have to reveal their names and identity in order to be eligible for funding. Each shareholder and director will have to prove their identity (example, driver
quote:
[font=roboto]Every shareholder and director shall have to reveal their names and identity in order to be eligible for funding. Each shareholder and director will have to prove their identity (example, driver
I hope this fund is used wisely, and IMHO only for key contributions difficult to achieve without this funding.
The key point to success of the NEM community is to have an active self-sustaining community. It would be sad that this fund deters people to contribute on voluntary basis. Or to get to the situation where all contributors disappear because they won't get funded anymore.
As an example I know well, I would say this funding should not be used to fund the development of things like https://github.com/rb2nem/nem-docker . These kind of development should come from FOSS developers, believing in NEM and wanting to contribute to it.
I think this fund should be reserved to more strategic and grand-scale projects. This seems to be the case though, as it is encouraged to apply as a company
This is a great initiative, and I hope it is managed brilliantly so that it helps NEM long term!
A very difficult decision is the part about voting.
I really don't know if the numbers mentioned in the draft will work out. Nobody knows… Maybe we need a certain test time or something like that?
Something i just noticed. I wouldn't set a date for voting. I'd set a week or so. You can't expect everyone to vote on the same day.
quote:
[font=roboto]Every shareholder and director shall have to reveal their names and identity in order to be eligible for funding. Each shareholder and director will have to prove their identity (example, driver
Something i just noticed. I wouldn't set a date for voting. I'd set a week or so. You can't expect everyone to vote on the same day.
Good catch. This was meant to be a range.
IMO there should be an initial voting round to confirm the plan is accepted by the community.
This could be the baseline to set some targets with regards to voting participation.
As said before there should be a requirement to submit proposals in proper English. If not this would only cause confusion.
Apart from that, it would be nice to have some sort of system for sustainability. It would be a pity to see the fund drained over time and in the meanwhile maybe some beneficiaries of the fund may be successful companies. If in some way we could achieve a sustainable environment to fund start ups by setting up a default scheme to return the funds ???
I know this is difficult so this should probably be proposed as part of the application. Then the community can decide whether NEM benefits sufficiently from the supplied funds.
As I see it , either NEM should benefit directly or there should be a return of the funds.
Obviously this is not something that can be determined in advance, so this is probably where the voting will be usefull. But maybe the program should give some guidance on what is expected in return. It's shouldn't be about giving away XEM, but building an ecosystem (short and long term).
Maybe a template could be drafted that shall be completed as application with fields for all required information. This to achieve some standardisation in the applications. It would ensure better oversight IMO.
And as my last comment; why limit the amount requested? That's why we have the voting…
If someone asks for a lot of funds , it'll better be a good proposal; otherwise it won't pass the voting, right…
Formalising a long term relationship with funded companies is a nice idea. Might be on voluntary basis, but request with a proposal of return to nem would be sttonger.
It is not possible to "formalize" a relationship with a legal entity because NEM is not a legal entity. If that was really desired, we would have to create a foundation or something and register it legally. Any thoughts on that?
Formalising was maybe too strong a word. Protoshare had a social consensus [1], and it seems it was accepted by most, even though not enforced.
Maybe that candidates can state in their proposal what they are willing to do in case of success of their company or project? Pay back the fund, give x% of profit during y time, .... On the other hand, the first criteria for choice should be the quality of the project and what it will bring to NEM. It's better to have a project growing nem not paying back, than a project with no impact and paying back the funds....
Also: at least some of the candidates will work on NEM projects in addition to other projects, and so NEM will not be their only concern. Letting them clarify what they are ready to do to additionaly help/promote/support NEM could provide more insight for voters.
[1] http://wiki.bitshares.org/index.php/BitShares/Social_Consensus
good idea!!! go for it
It companies using NEM are very successful, it probably makes more sense for them to pay for the ongoing development and not into the community fund.
In the future, some kind of sustainable revenue sharing with NEM transaction fees might work to make the community fund sustainable for the long term.
It may be that that several applicants are going through the process of incorporation whilst organising various aspects of their projects. Its not neccesary to prevent these people from applying now surely. As long as they have incorporated before any issuance of funds then there should be no restrictions .Let the community see whats going on !!!