About 15 years ago, I was asked to help start a local educational foundation. I got a new insight into how grants and funding organizations function from a completely different perspective. And this was a small local foundation with hundreds of thousands of dollars and a dozen applicants a year mind you. It wasn't a foundation consisting of millions of dollars and hundreds of applicants. I had no time back then because I was a new father and started a new job, so I wasn't able to continue with the foundation. I cannot even begin to image the amount of time and effort, and headaches that it takes to run these types of organizations. Are they perfect? Absolutely not because nothing is perfect. But telling a developer to not build or starve because you don't like how something was handled in a near impossible task is something I would never do. I'll let them make their own decisions with all of the information that I have available.
Discussion
And I have every right as a contributor (not recently) to OS to know WTF that money goes to and how selections are made. They have not and seemingly refuse to answer simple questions about that, which I find exceedingly sus.
And, in keeping with BTC ethos: I do not trust what I cannot verify. Therefore, I will not trust them.
If people want to apply, that's fine. I'm by no means getting in the way of that. I just want to hold OS accountable.
Additional tansparency would be great. Sure! For example, I was denied a grant. I don't know why, though I could make an educated guess perhaps? Oh well. That won't stop me from recommending them to others that need funding. Plus, I have personally met many board members and grant recipients. I know their hearts and minds are in the correct places. I consider many friends, some closer than others, and I see the benefits of OpenSats to them first hand. You don't have to trust, but assuming the worst might not be the correct path either.