[bisq-network/compensation] For Cycle 8 (#417)

[Julian Knutsen]

Thanks for pointing out the prior requests that were accepted with this amount.

I can understand the need for user-facing documents to be edited like this. Having fewer typos and grammar mistakes gives off a more confident tone and may encourage more users to try out the software.

But as a newcomer here, it still isn't clear to me why the project needs to sustain a 10 BSQ inflation for every comment that doesn't have perfect grammar or capitalization. This project will always have contributors that may not have English as their first language and it isn't productive to have code reviewers double-checking and polluting reviews with grammar checks.

How should a DAO voter look at this type of work in the broader scope of user-value and decide that this is something that should be funded?

If this is important, how expensive would it be to just automate the grammar checking every month and obviate this type of manual work?

Lastly, as a nit, I'm not 100% sure the incubator projects are still funded so contributions to those repositories seem even less valuable.

This is my first cycle with the project so these questions may seem a bit different than previous iterations. I'm trying to get caught up with how __*delivery*__ and __*value*__ fit in with different types of requests.

Happy to hear your thoughts. Thanks.


-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/compensation/issues/417#issuecomment-564864161
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20191211/ee6ba7e0/attachment.html>