Vamsi krishna

Project Owner

OnchAIn Asia Hub

Type Community RFP
Funding Awarded $10,000 USD
RFP Guidelines Deep Funding Community Hubs

Status

Overall Status
⏳ Contract Pending
Funding Transfered
$0_USD
Max Funding Amount
$10,000_USD

Funding Schedule

View Milestones

Milestone Release 1	$2,500 USD	Pending	TBD
Milestone Release 2	$5,000 USD	Pending	TBD
Milestone Release 3	$2,500 USD	Pending	TBD

Overview

The onchAIn Asia Hub aims to create a vibrant, decentralized community focused on expanding Deep Funding’s reach across Asia’s diverse cultures, languages, and time zones. By organizing regular events, fostering education on funding processes, and building strong networks among AI, blockchain, and tech enthusiasts, the hub will drive community growth and quality proposal submissions. Tailored activities, informed by regional insights, will resonate with local communities, ensuring alignment with Deep Funding’s vision of decentralization and collaboration. Strategic partnerships, targeted outreach, and consistent engagement will be key.

RFP Guidelines

Deep Funding Community Hubs

Complete & Awarded

Type Community RFP
Total RFP Funding $50,000 USD
Proposals 5
Awarded Projects 4

Rafael Cardoso

Jan. 8, 2025

Rafael Cardoso

rfp owner

Deep Funding Community Hubs

Complete & Awarded

Tags:
Community and Collaboration

We are seeking individuals to lead and manage Deep Funding Community Hub initiatives. These initiatives aim to establish and foster decentralized Deep Funding Communities centered around specific topics or areas of interest where a dedicated community would be valuable. Examples of potential hubs include:

Sustainability Community Hub,
Women in AI Community Hub,
Africa Community Hub,
Asia Community Hub
French-Speaking Hub.
Among many other options

The primary objective of these Community Hubs is to expand Deep Funding in a decentralized way. This involves engaging new members, providing information, sharing best practices for submitting funding proposals and building strong, collaborative communities. Regular online meetings will also be an integral part of these initiatives to connect, grow, and support the community.

View Full RFP

Sustainability Community Hub,
Women in AI Community Hub,
Africa Community Hub,
Asia Community Hub
French-Speaking Hub.
Among many other options

Proposal Description

Our Team

2:47 PM Studio: APAC’s Premier Web 3 Ecosystem Growth Consulting and Venture Studio

Company Name (if applicable)

2:47 PM Studio

Project details

The onchAIn Asia Hub aims to build a thriving, decentralized community of AI and blockchain enthusiasts across Asia. With a focus on rapid growth, the hub will onboard 200+ AI-focused developers in the first month and expand to 1K+ members within 3 months. By hosting weekly town halls, sharing AI-related content, memes, and educational materials, and reposting global Deep Funding content with a native touch, the hub will drive engagement and proposal submissions to Deep Funding RFPs.

The hub’s long-term vision is to establish a sustainable, consistent presence that fosters innovation and collaboration. By leveraging social media platforms, forming strategic partnerships, and tailoring content to resonate with local cultures and languages, the Asia Community Hub will become a cornerstone for Deep Funding’s growth in the region.

Existing resources

We've been hosting Web3 events and hackathons for the past three years, building a strong community across India. We can leverage this community to host in-person events and support social media campaigns. Additionally, we have several AI-focused members who work on AI × Web3 projects.

Links and references

Few previous works :
● HackerHouse Goa After Movie
● Thread on events hosted during India Blockchain Week 2024 with CoinDCX,Base,CoinEx,Spheron etc

Case Study of Hacker House Goa :
Here is the link to the detailed case of Hacker House Goa.

Unfortunately our site is not live as we are working on announcing OnChain Island , but here it
is: 247pm.studio

Was there any event, initiative or publication that motivated you to register/submit this proposal?

A personal referral

Describe the particulars.

The Nerd Conf team, with Ale Marin and Tom serving as advisors, has been a major source of inspiration for us in creating this proposal.

Activity Summary

Milestones

3

Total

Discussion

0

Total Comments

Reviews

0

Total Posted

Project Team

2

Total People

Reviews & Rating

New reviews and ratings are disabled for Awarded Projects

Overall Community

0

from 0 reviews

5

0
4

0
3

0
2

0
1

0

Feasibility

0

from 0 reviews

Viability

0

from 0 reviews

Desirabilty

0

from 0 reviews

Usefulness

0

from 0 reviews

Sort by

0 ratings

No Reviews Avaliable

Check back later by refreshing the page.

Posting publicaly as

edit profile

Overall

Confidence level that the project is possible at all Feasibility

0
Confidence in a successful outcome considering team, time, and budget Viability

0
Market fit - Balancing needs and benefits against competition Desirabilty

0
To what extent will the project help the AI platform grow? Usefulness

0

Review Headline

0 /50 chars

Review Summary

0 /5000 chars

Expert Review

Overall

Confidence level that the project is possible at all Feasibility

0
Confidence in a successful outcome considering team, time, and budget Viability

0
Market fit - Balancing needs and benefits against competition Desirabilty

0
To what extent will the project help the AI platform grow? Usefulness

0

Review Headline

0 /50 chars

Review Summary

0 /5000 chars

Reviews and Ratings in Deep Funding are structured in 4 categories. This will ensure that the reviewer takes all these perspectives into account in their assessment and it will make it easier to compare different projects on their strengths and weaknesses. Overall (Primary) This is an average of the 4 perspectives. At the start of this new process, we are assigning an equal weight to all categories, but over time we might change this and make some categories more important than others in the overall score. (This may even be done retroactively). Feasibility (secondary) This represents the user's assessment of whether the proposed project is theoretically possible and if it is deemed feasible. E.g. A proposal for nuclear fission might be theoretically possible, but it doesn’t look very feasible in the context of Deep Funding. Viability (secondary) This category is somewhat similar to Feasibility, but it interprets the feasibility against factors such as the size and experience of the team, the budget requested, and the estimated timelines. We could frame this as: “What is your level of confidence that this team will be able to complete this project and its milestones in a reasonable time, and successfully deploy it?” Examples:

A proposal that promises the development of a personal assistant that outperforms existing solutions might be feasible, but if there is no AI expertise in the team the viability rating might be low.
A proposal that promises a new Carbon Emission Compensation scheme might be technically feasible, but the viability could be estimated low due to challenges around market penetration and widespread adoption.

Desirability (secondary) Even if the project team succeeds in creating a product, there is the question of market fit. Is this a project that fulfills an actual need? Is there a lot of competition already? Are the USPs of the project sufficient to make a difference? Example:

Creating a translation service from, say Spanish to English might be possible, but it's questionable if such a service would be able to get a significant share of the market

Usefulness (secondary) This is a crucial category that aligns with the main goal of the Deep Funding program. The question to be asked here is: “To what extent will this proposal help to grow the Decentralized AI Platform?” For proposals that develop or utilize an AI service on the platform, the question could be “How many API calls do we expect it to generate” (and how important / high-valued are these calls?). For a marketing proposal, the question could be “How large and well-aligned is the target audience?” Another question is related to how the budget is spent. Are the funds mainly used for value creation for the platform or on other things? Examples:

A metaverse project that spends 95% of its budget on the development of the game and only 5 % on the development of an AI service for the platform might expect a low ‘usefulness’ rating here.

A marketing proposal that creates t-shirts for a local high school, would get a lower ‘usefulness’ rating than a marketing proposal that has a viable plan for targeting highly esteemed universities in a scaleable way.
An AI service that is fully dedicated to a single product, does not take advantage of the purpose of the platform. When the same service would be offered and useful for other parties, this should increase the ‘usefulness’ rating.

Reviews and Ratings in Deep Funding are structured in 4 categories. This will ensure that the reviewer takes all these perspectives into account in their assessment and it will make it easier to compare different projects on their strengths and weaknesses. Overall (Primary) This is an average of the 4 perspectives. At the start of this new process, we are assigning an equal weight to all categories, but over time we might change this and make some categories more important than others in the overall score. (This may even be done retroactively). Feasibility (secondary) This represents the user\'s assessment of whether the proposed project is theoretically possible and if it is deemed feasible. E.g. A proposal for nuclear fission might be theoretically possible, but it doesn’t look very feasible in the context of Deep Funding. Viability (secondary) This category is somewhat similar to Feasibility, but it interprets the feasibility against factors such as the size and experience of the team, the budget requested, and the estimated timelines. We could frame this as: “What is your level of confidence that this team will be able to complete this project and its milestones in a reasonable time, and successfully deploy it?” Examples:

A proposal that promises the development of a personal assistant that outperforms existing solutions might be feasible, but if there is no AI expertise in the team the viability rating might be low.
A proposal that promises a new Carbon Emission Compensation scheme might be technically feasible, but the viability could be estimated low due to challenges around market penetration and widespread adoption.

Creating a translation service from, say Spanish to English might be possible, but it\'s questionable if such a service would be able to get a significant share of the market

A metaverse project that spends 95% of its budget on the development of the game and only 5 % on the development of an AI service for the platform might expect a low ‘usefulness’ rating here.

A marketing proposal that creates t-shirts for a local high school, would get a lower ‘usefulness’ rating than a marketing proposal that has a viable plan for targeting highly esteemed universities in a scaleable way.
An AI service that is fully dedicated to a single product, does not take advantage of the purpose of the platform. When the same service would be offered and useful for other parties, this should increase the ‘usefulness’ rating.

Total Milestones
3
Total Budget
$10,000_USD
Last Updated
2 May 2025

Milestone 1 - Launch and Initial Growth

Status

😐 Not Started

Description

Launch the onchAIn Asia Hub, onboard 200+ AI-focused developers in a month, and establish a strong social media presence. Host virtual events like weekly town halls and AI community workshops to engage members and motivate them to submit proposals for Deep Funding RFPs within 3 months

Deliverables

- Functional Telegram group with 200+ AI-focused developers. - First weekly town hall hosted (e.g., introduction to Deep Funding and AI trends). - AI community workshops to educate members on proposal writing and RFP opportunities. - Social media channels set up with AI-related content, memes, and native adaptations of global Deep Funding posts.

Budget

$2,500 USD

Success Criterion

- 200+ AI-focused developers join the community. - 50+ attendees at the first town hall. - 5–10 proposals drafted or submitted to Deep Funding RFPs. - Social media channels gain 500+ followers.

Link URL

Milestone 2 - Rapid Expansion and Engagement

Status

😐 Not Started

Description

Expand the community to 1K+ members, host weekly virtual town halls, and introduce in-person AI events to deepen engagement. Drive participation through AI-focused content, proposal education, and regional outreach.

Deliverables

- Weekly virtual town halls with 100+ attendees each. - 1K+ members in the Telegram/Discord group. - 10+ AI-related posts per week on social media, including memes, educational content, and proposal-writing tips. - Repost global Deep Funding content with native adaptations for better engagement. - Organize in-person AI events (e.g., meetups, hackathons) in key Asian cities.

Budget

$5,000 USD

Success Criterion

- 1K+ members in the community. - 100+ attendees at weekly town halls. - 2–3 in-person AI events hosted with 50+ participants each. - Social media engagement (likes, shares, comments) increases by 50%

Link URL

Milestone 3 - Proposal Generation and Sustainability

Status

😐 Not Started

Description

Focus on driving quality proposals to Deep Funding RFPs and establishing a sustainable model for the hub’s long-term success. Continue hosting weekly town halls and in-person events while onboarding members into Deep Funding Circles.

Deliverables

- 10+ proposals submitted to Deep Funding by hub members. - Onboarding of 5+ community members into Deep Funding Circles. - Development of a sustainability plan (e.g., DAO structure, funding pool). - Continued weekly town halls and social media engagement. - Additional in-person AI events hosted in new regions.

Budget

$2,500 USD

Success Criterion

- 10+ proposals submitted and approved by Deep Funding. - 5+ members actively participating in Deep Funding Circles. - Sustainability plan approved by the Events Circle. - 3–5 in-person AI events hosted with growing attendance.

Link URL

Join the Discussion (0)

Expert Ratings

Reviews & Ratings

New reviews and ratings are disabled for Awarded Projects

No Reviews Avaliable

Check back later by refreshing the page.

The weighted average of the 4 perspectives Overall

0.0
Each RFP defines a maximum allowed budget, but teams can differentiate their proposal by offering a solution with a lower budget or a wider scope.Value for money

0.0
This rating indicates compliance to 'Must haves' but also adaptation of 'Nice to haves' and Non-functional requirements defined in the RFP.Compliance with RFP requirements

0.0
RFPs will offer varying degrees of freedom. This rating indicates the quality of the team's specific solution ideas, the provided details, and the reviewer's confidence in the team's ability to execute.Solution details and team expertise

0.0

Review Headline

0 /50 chars

Review Summary

0 /5000 chars

The weighted average of the 4 perspectives Overall

0.0
Each RFP defines a maximum allowed budget, but teams can differentiate their proposal by offering a solution with a lower budget or a wider scope.Value for money

0.0
This rating indicates compliance to 'Must haves' but also adaptation of 'Nice to haves' and Non-functional requirements defined in the RFP.Compliance with RFP requirements

0.0
RFPs will offer varying degrees of freedom. This rating indicates the quality of the team's specific solution ideas, the provided details, and the reviewer's confidence in the team's ability to execute.Solution details and team expertise

0.0

Review Headline

0 /50 chars

0 /5000 chars

Warning: Adding final group rating for this project will prevent expert users from adding new or editing existing reviews

Reviews and Ratings in Deep Funding are structured in 4 categories. This will ensure that the reviewer takes all these perspectives into account in their assessment and it will make it easier to compare different projects on their strengths and weaknesses. Overall (Primary) This is an average of the 4 perspectives. At the start of this new process, we are assigning an equal weight to all categories, but over time we might change this and make some categories more important than others in the overall score. (This may even be done retroactively). Feasibility (secondary) This represents the user\'s assessment of whether the proposed project is theoretically possible and if it is deemed feasible. E.g. A proposal for nuclear fission might be theoretically possible, but it doesn’t look very feasible in the context of Deep Funding. Viability (secondary) This category is somewhat similar to Feasibility, but it interprets the feasibility against factors such as the size and experience of the team, the budget requested, and the estimated timelines. We could frame this as: “What is your level of confidence that this team will be able to complete this project and its milestones in a reasonable time, and successfully deploy it?” Examples:

A proposal that promises the development of a personal assistant that outperforms existing solutions might be feasible, but if there is no AI expertise in the team the viability rating might be low.
A proposal that promises a new Carbon Emission Compensation scheme might be technically feasible, but the viability could be estimated low due to challenges around market penetration and widespread adoption.

Creating a translation service from, say Spanish to English might be possible, but it\'s questionable if such a service would be able to get a significant share of the market

A metaverse project that spends 95% of its budget on the development of the game and only 5 % on the development of an AI service for the platform might expect a low ‘usefulness’ rating here.

A marketing proposal that creates t-shirts for a local high school, would get a lower ‘usefulness’ rating than a marketing proposal that has a viable plan for targeting highly esteemed universities in a scaleable way.
An AI service that is fully dedicated to a single product, does not take advantage of the purpose of the platform. When the same service would be offered and useful for other parties, this should increase the ‘usefulness’ rating.

Vamsi krishna

Project Owner

Full-stack AI & Blockchain Developer

View Profile

PRAYASU SATAPATHY

Lead

Project Lead

View Profile

OnchAIn Asia Hub

Vamsi krishna

OnchAIn Asia Hub

Status

⏳ Contract Pending

$0 USD

$10,000 USD

Funding Schedule

Milestone Release 1

Milestone Release 2

Milestone Release 3

Project AI Services

Overview

RFP Guidelines

Deep Funding Community Hubs

Rafael Cardoso

Proposal Description

Our Team

Company Name (if applicable)

Project details

Existing resources

Links and references

Was there any event, initiative or publication that motivated you to register/submit this proposal?

Describe the particulars.

Activity Summary

Milestones

3

Discussion

0

Reviews

0

Project Team

2

Proposal Video

Not Avaliable Yet

Reviews & Rating

Overall Community

0

Feasibility

0

Viability

0

Desirabilty

0

Usefulness

0

Sort by

No Reviews Avaliable

3

$10,000 USD

2 May 2025

Milestone 1 - Launch and Initial Growth

Status

Description

Deliverables

Budget

Success Criterion

Link URL

Milestone 2 - Rapid Expansion and Engagement

Status

Description

Deliverables

Budget

Success Criterion

Link URL

Milestone 3 - Proposal Generation and Sustainability

Status

Description

Deliverables

Budget

Success Criterion

Link URL

Join the Discussion (0)

Expert Ratings

No Reviews Avaliable

Vamsi krishna

PRAYASU SATAPATHY

Receive notifications on Deep Funding

Subscribe To NewsLetter

Product

$0_USD

$10,000_USD

$10,000_USD