Welcome!

This proposal has served it's purpose and has been retired in favor of other new projects. Please vote "NO" on this proposal to actively remove it from the payment queue. Thanks!

---

The core team has already proposed that the funds associated with the Public Awareness budget would be much better spent on accelerating development and on creation of fiat gateways. See the full post from Dashtalk here.

Some in the community asserted that - even though people that disagree with the reallocation of resources have the ability to vote the Public Awareness proposal down - it is a bad precedence to set regardless of the fact that 1) we were confident that the community would agree with the change, and 2) most people seem supportive even if they disagree with the process (e.g., "ends justify the means"). So why didn't we just ask the community to vote out Public Awareness and vote in the new proposal? Several reasons:

1) It would constitute a great deal of collective effort - not just for the core team, but for all the MN owners to go in and down-vote P.A... All for a project that we have a high level of confidence would pass regardless.

2) It would also pose a significant risk that we might not get enough actively downvoted MN votes to kick out the PR budget within the 6 days before the budget finalized. The P.A. budget enjoys lots of support, and sitting at 42% support at the time we made the change, the core team alone couldn't vote out our own proposal. The ability of a proposal owner to revoke or cancel its own proposal isn't a function of the first budget system. Without getting it downvoted properly, there could have been unintended consequences (like PR still funding, the new proposal ALSO funding, which could then cause a bunch of other valuable projects to NOT receive funding).

3) The final rationale is that if the core team misjudged the reaction of the community, we are being transparent about the change, so the community is STILL FREE to downvote the PR proposal if it disagrees with how the money is to be spent OR the manner in which we redirected funds.

All things considered, we thought this was the better path to take given we are 6 days from budget finalization. However, some community members - while they understood these points and support the change - are still concerned. I had proposed on Dashtalk the idea of putting a "decision proposal" out to the network in lieu of simply the announcement of the proposed change. I think this approach still addresses the "downvote risk" in #2 above, but also ensures that the change can only be made by getting the necessary votes, and not by simply slipping a change through before absent MN owners notice. This should allow us to "make it official" with community support, while reducing the risk of a full downvote of the old and upvote of the new. The reallocation will only occur with the community's official approval.