Yes, that is better. And maybe the peer4commit text in a light shade of Peercoin green?
BTW is there a reason why there is a lot of empty space in the banner? Is that part of the design or is there a tecnnical reason for that?
Thanks RobertLloyd for providing such detailed feedback. Much appreciated. As you did notice I already made some updates after the first draft which I posted over the weekend (final draft).
My comments to yours in green below. I intended to close the feedback today, but I really appreciate your feedback so I suggest to leave it open for another 2 days. Hope that suits you. We really like to launch the fund this weekend. Hope you can continue your review with the latest version. I have updated the 2nd version I posted according to my comments.
[quote=“RobertLloyd, post:33, topic:2522”]Hi, Cybnate & River
I am reading though the draft, am about halfway though. I thought I would give my thoughts/comments so far, and continue the second half, later in the week
My comments are inserted in bold
Note that some of the numbering does not match your latest draft, as I was working from your original draft
[quote=“Cybnate, post:1, topic:2522”]— DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR ESTABLISHING A MARKETING FUND —
[size=14pt]Introducing the Peercoin marketing fund[/size]
After submitting your plan, the community will consider it by the parameters posted below and discuss it for at most one fortnight, in which time we can ask you to clarify points that are not clear or would need changing. Then the community will vote**. If your submission is accepted arrangements will be made on payment if that is not part of your proposal.
The bit about one fortnight conflicts with Point 9 below (Turnaround times), so I suggest you amend to “between one and three weeks”.
Can you rephrase the last sentence of the above paragraph (starting “If your submission…”), as it does not make sense, at least not to me.
Agree, already took that the fortnight bit out in latest draft. Will delete the other sentence as they should provide payment method in their proposal anyway
[size=12pt]FORMAT FOR PROPOSALS:[/size]
Proposals need the following details. We will not accept proposals without these:
- Peercointalk or Github account and email/contact info for submitter
Suggest you put “and/or” between each contact selection
I came back on the Github as it doesn’t make sense. Changed to Peercointalk only.
- Submission date
I wonder if this is this necessary, since the date of submission will be the date they post it
Well they can chose to delay the formal submission date and still communicate their intention by posting it, but maybe it doesn’t make sense? Will keep it for now
- Budget
Be as specific as possible. Try to use accepted costs as CPM/CPC and CPA. (Cost per mille (views/impressions), Cost per Click, Cost Per Acquisition).
Sloppy budgets will not be accepted for a vote.
[b]I am not sure about “accepted costs as CPM/CPC and CPA”, as it is seems too specific. How about changing it to: “Be as specific as possible. Give costs in dollars/pounds/euros, etc. estimated per day/print run/product, etc. as per your proposal”
Suggest changing “sloppy” to “vague”[/b]
Was meant as an example, but I like your more generic proposal and will change sloppy to vague or incomplete 
- Specify deadlines
No project can be without a specific time limit. We need to know when you plan to either implement it, or when a project is supposed to go live.
Suggest changing the emphasis to “timescales” and “duration”, rather than start and end dates, as some proposals may be freestanding as to when they can start
Timescales are a bit tricky imo. We need to have some start and end dates. Although I’m good with proposal containing dependencies which might influence start date including the extent of the change of start or end date. Tend to stick with what I have as we need some commitment from submitter
- Metrics need to be specified
How are you going to check how many people you reached? This is needed to be able to see how successful you are in your aims.
Success might not be in terms of people (e.g. it could be revenue, press releases, etc.), so suggest generalising the emphasis to “How will the success of the proposal be measured”
That is a very open question which might introduce scope creep. This is about marketing, marketing is about communication so primary performance measure is number of people being aware and quality of awareness. Once people are informed they might generate revenue but that would be hard to trace back to the submission (not asking for a business case). Press release is a means to get to people. I can issues many press releases to the world, but no-one would probably read them, unless I send them to the right people with information useful for them. That would define the target group. Probably need some more feedback on this one as I’m on the fence myself
- Turnaround times
Requests will be turned around in 7-10 days for smaller requests. Larger ones (e.g. 250 PPC+) may take up to 14-17 days to allow community to discuss and the voting process to happen. Extensions of discussion time can be allowed at discretion of fund keepers on request of community or submitter(s). Reasonable requests will be granted automatically.
I would suggest changing the times to 7-14 days, and 14-21 days, to tie in with weeks
The idea is to have up to a week for small request to discuss an then 3 days for the voting. 2 weeks for medium size and 3 days voting. Happy to extend it but submitters may moan about the long process especially when they have smaller requests. Will keep for now
- Payments
Payments will be in PPC and to an address mentioned in the proposal. Proof of ownership of that address may be required.
Suggest changing to “mentioned” to “provided by the submitter”.
Like that one. Changed
— END OF PROPOSAL FOR MARKETING FUND —[/quote][/quote]
To not slow things down too much (see review extensions in my previous post), I like to start with the voting aspect for the fund keepers.
The fund needs at least two fund keepers to function properly and provide some continuation. The fund keepers needed to be voted in according to the charter.
Both River333 and I are putting our names up for the role of voluntary fund keeper for the next 6 months. We both hope that with our work indirectly our coins (and yours) will increase in value and that this community will be buzzing even more. We will follow the charter as posted in this thread and with that will try to manage the fund as good as we both can.
I do have to mention that the charter allows for a third fund keeper. This would help spread the load when things really take off, but I don’t think that is an urgent issue at the start. However, if someone is interested than feel free to put your hand up. If not, it is still fine, as we are both good to start with just the two of us for now.
In order to get us both voted in we need at least 8 people voting for us and the majority of them should be in favour of us. This will be a good test how the voting works.
I will wait another 2 days (till end of proposal feedback) to see if there are any other candidates before I ask the community to vote for the candidates.
@River333 and others feel free to post your thoughts on the voting for the fund keepers.
[quote=“Sentinelrv, post:40, topic:2522”]Is this any better?
[/quote]
Why not call the intiative Peerfund, wth the explanatory slogan “The fund for Peercoin’s marketing”
I had thought about “Peerfund” but decided at the time that it was maybe too generic, and might be better suited for something else.
Cybnate, here are two different shades of green, not sure which one you want.
@sentinelrv, fine with both of them, slightly prefer the second brighter one.
Peerfund sounds a bit too generic to me. Marketing Peerfund might work. We can rename it later, I guess.
[quote=“Cybnate, post:47, topic:2522”]@sentinelrv, fine with both of them, slightly prefer the second brighter one.
Peerfund sounds a bit too generic to me. Marketing Peerfund might work. We can rename it later, I guess.[/quote]
The problem with Peerfund is that there’s no i in the word, so I won’t be able to include the standard little leaf. The only way I can think of including it would be inside the loop of the P, but I don’t that would look good enough.
What about Peerfunding?
Sounds very active 
or maybe have a larger version of the leaf before or at the end of Peerfund or somewhere else in the banner. Like a logo. Not sure if that works for the leaf, I’m not a designer after all, but found some examples of that type of design.
I like the darker green version. I think “Peerfund” or “Peerfunding” isn’t marketing-specific enough. Looking good!
[quote=“Cybnate, post:43, topic:2522”]To not slow things down too much (see review extensions in my previous post), I like to start with the voting aspect for the fund keepers.
The fund needs at least two fund keepers to function properly and provide some continuation. The fund keepers needed to be voted in according to the charter.
Both River333 and I are putting our names up for the role of voluntary fund keeper for the next 6 months. We both hope that with our work indirectly our coins (and yours) will increase in value and that this community will be buzzing even more. We will follow the charter as posted in this thread and with that will try to manage the fund as good as we both can.
I do have to mention that the charter allows for a third fund keeper. This would help spread the load when things really take off, but I don’t think that is an urgent issue at the start. However, if someone is interested than feel free to put your hand up. If not, it is still fine, as we are both good to start with just the two of us for now.
In order to get us both voted in we need at least 8 people voting for us and the majority of them should be in favour of us. This will be a good test how the voting works.
I will wait another 2 days (till end of proposal feedback) to see if there are any other candidates before I ask the community to vote for the candidates.
@River333 and others feel free to post your thoughts on the voting for the fund keepers.[/quote]
The deadline for volunteering for the role of fund keeper will close at 12pm UTC on Thursday 26th (~36 hours from now) so that voting can start soon on the candidates.
And just to confirm, I am volunteering for the role.
The volunteering phase has ended and the only candidates are Cybnate and myself.
Please vote in the following thread: http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=3038.msg28160#msg28160
i have adjusted the fourm image resize so your images should not resize and itort.
looking at the black card… the QR code could be more flashy…
make them at http://qrcoin.qrcodes.us/
Fuzzybear
Thanks for the resizing, and nice QR code, but decoding gets a bit more difficult. Had to make sure photo was perfect before my phone decoded this one.
As QR is not that important I think we should add it in like that. Will check with river333 and sentinelrv.
Voting has finished and the fund is now live.
See the Template for Submissions for more information on how to submit a proposal.
And we already have our first proposal!
[quote=“Cybnate, post:55, topic:2522”]Thanks for the resizing, and nice QR code, but decoding gets a bit more difficult. Had to make sure photo was perfect before my phone decoded this one.
As QR is not that important I think we should add it in like that. Will check with river333 and sentinelrv.[/quote]
It looks good to me, and yeah not many are going to use QR codes until we have a mobile wallet.