Thanks folks for joining the discussion , and I'd like to help disprove "politics and rumors of conspiracy".

ev said: As for other behind-the-scenes mechinations, I have no idea what conversations are happening in NZ around these grants.

I'm not in NZ, never have been. This round of SSBC grants was organized by Teq and adjudicated by me. I don't think Teq is in NZ either, but it wouldn't matter anyway.

ev said: Even though there were two proposals, and three slots, your proposal would be written off ...

This argument of numAcceptance < numSlots was brought up a few times as an act of excluding a person, but in fact there is no requirement to fill in all the 4 or 3 slots per month with any remaining proposals, and in fact in May there were 4 slots but I passed only 3 proposals, rejecting 2 proposals (both from men!) %CnkbBEj...

Like software tests, you can never be sure that your software is bug-free, so with group communication you can never be sure that others are not secretly conspiring against you. One can always be paranoiac enough to come up with a plausible argument for conspiracy.

Going forwards, this discussion becomes less and less relevant the closer we come to the next SSBC grants. It's that often that it reduces the drama involved when a proposal is postponed. Simultaneously, I can attest that there are multiple other grant efforts going on to bring in more money from various organizations. Some from the EU, some from Ethereum foundation, from Blockstack, from crowdsourcing. Some of these got rejected by those organizations, some have good potential to pass. We don't want this current SSBC grants process to be the only money bucket and Dominic to be the only head, so let's keep in mind the big picture here. There's lot of people involved with various motivations and processes and in various countries.