User Review
AI Review
A1
Reviewed on 14 Feb 2024 02:02 PM
Projects must be at least 3 months old. We use Twitter, web domain registration date, and other public info to determine this. Newer projects should establish themselves and submit to the next round.
The provided information is insufficient to determine the project's age as there are no specific dates provided for Twitter creation, web domain registration, or other similar indicators.
The Grant must be **primarily focused on climate solutions** (the group may do other work but the grant proposal should be directly related to climate solutions). The proposal should explicitly outline how this project will help reduce GHGs or is an important core infrastructure for web3 climate solutions.
The project description mentions that Alinticoin aims to extract energy from trees and sequester carbon, which is directly related to reducing greenhouse gases and could be considered a climate solution.
Grantees who received funding in a previous round(s) **must provide a new update on their progress and impact.** You can also include the challenges you've faced. This will ensure accountability to supporters and also help encourage contributors by showing what you’ve been accomplishing.
Without access to previous funding rounds' information or progress updates from the project, it is not possible to determine if they have complied with this requirement.
All returning grantees are expected to update their proposal, in addition to project updates the proposal should include lessons learned from previous work and how they will use the additional funding from the upcoming round. The updated proposal should indicate how additional funding will help the project meet its goals, and include a rough timeline for the project overall.
There is no information provided regarding any previous grants, updates, or a refined proposal with lessons learned, which makes it uncertain if this requirement is met.
There is a general expectation that projects are within the **“realm of viability”**. Even if a project is very early, it must still seem credible to the average person with an understanding of web3 technology and climate solutions. Including information about the team's expertise, qualifications and skills will help us review your grant.
The project claims to know how to extract electricity from plants, but there is no available evidence or detailed information on the team's qualifications or technological feasibility to assess the project's viability.
Grantees can be eliminated from consideration in the round if they are found to be encouraging or enabling Sybil attacks or other forms of malicious manipulation of the grants platform or the Gitcoin community.
There is no evidence provided or available to suggest that the project has engaged in Sybil attacks or malicious manipulation, but at the same time, there isn't sufficient data to categorically rule out such behavior.