RE: Clarification and Questions Answered about My Proposal in Response to a Post by Belemo

I'm open to discussion if that's what you want. Could you try to approach your issues more objectively and less subjective? It's normal to share what is important to you, I respect that, but it helps to know that not everyone shares the same opinion. It would make it easier to get to the core of your issues.

But based upon what I just read from your comments;

You're comparing completely different proposals
You're sharing multiple concerns around the payment
You're doubting/questioning/need assurance that she would continue her work on the project as described in the proposal
You believe it is mostly to cover expenses for past work
You're sharing that it is unfair to ask to get paid for past work

What you're sharing is simply a dead-end, leaving very little room for discussion or a solution as one issue is in direct conflict with another. I'm not sure if you're aware of that, or if this is purposely intended.

You judge her for asking partial payment for her past work, right? At the same time, you want assurance that she continues her "past work" work. How would you value the continuation of that work, if you already shared your opinion that her past work is basically worth nothing? If you want to leave "past work" out of the equation, then judge the proposal with "past work" out of the equation.

For promised tasks described in the proposal, even if the outcome is not as we desired, $50HBD per hour I consider being undervalued, as it is still quite a risk since it is not a direct pay in FIAT. I'm leaving this "pay for past work" totally out when I'm measuring the amount of requested payment and judge her proposal based on her skills and previous achievements.

Which makes me think of a possible meet-in-the-middle solution; I'm not here to fill in the blanks for @Justineh, nor do I wish to talk on her behalf, but let's say, if you have a promise that says that X% of requested pay-out will remain in the platform, as well as X% of the pay-out will be extracted and exchanged for FIAT to cover expenses, would you be more sensible to support this proposal?

Also, I want to point out that the "past work" you're referring to is something that I would consider to be a USP in this case, and an additional incentive to pledge my vote.