Hive account@howo, thank you very much for your feedback.

I think overall a lot of those templates that were floating around were never really used because they weren't "enforced" or agreed upon by stakeholders I.E "I won't vote unless you fill this template". And I don't think they ever will unless it's a value plan situation where a council/an individual decides on where to allocate money. On the broader proposal system there's plenty of different voices and no unified voting (which is a good thing)

I’m sorry to disagree. It would be wonderful if future applications for European funding worked that way. But that’s not how it works. It is the applicant asking for the money who must explain how they intend to use it and justify their request. It is not the review and evaluation panel’s job to ask those questions. It is a basic rule that this information must be included in the application.

In fact, the applications I’m referring to are submitted via online platforms. They don’t move forward, nor are they accepted, if all the required fields haven’t been filled out. In the interest of rigor, whether in centralized or decentralized environments, there are items that must be included—and they are not being requested by the evaluators. That’s my opinion, based on my experience submitting applications for funding. Not at HIVE, mind you.

I am of the opinion that it's better to let people make their case however they think is best and let stakeholders ask followup questions (like you're doing!)

Some people don’t like asking “uncomfortable” questions. And those who do ask them sometimes do so in a tense tone.

As for the budget, it’s perfectly justified—given the country where he works. That’s just Claude’s price.

Proposal approved ✅

I wish you continued success in your work.