Except nostr grants are reserved to a tiny group of individuals. You have to first be a successful socialengineer.
I think most such adversarial questions will be answered in an spontaneous / organic manner rather than funded simulations.
Discussion
You are completely wrong on the first paragraph. Opensats has funded a lot of anons that have work to point to. All applications are evaluated solely on merit.
And correct on the second one. People shouldn’t apply to build it; they should build it and apply.
Really? Try generate a new npub/telegram/github for your next project and apply for a grant. Share the results later.
- A king must walk in the shoes of his people, if he wishes to stay royalty.
I tried, but GitHub has shadowbanned me because I wasn't using a gmail address (or some other reason I don't know). Then I tried again and it shadowbanned me again.
So let me ask: who is the person you have in mind who has done valuable work and applied for a grant that was rejected?
Well ofc if you apply with an account with zero history of doing anything that pubkey should not get a grant! Someone applying for a grant should show, in some way, some capability, self-motivation, resourcefulness, integrity, etc, etc; otherwise the opensats funds would fly away to a a few hundred spam pubkeys in a split second…
I am pretty sure we have also rejected a bunch of applications from clearly talented people who had a bunch of Nostr "clout" -- only because we didn't think the project/applications were a good match.
This. I’m pretty sure if you’d look at the distribution of “follower count” (as a crappy proxy for clout) of grantees it would show this being the case.