Looks good! Just a typo in the course name [Nonprofit Management for HistorianS] and perhaps before or after you say that we raised the equivalent of $6,000 you might explain that we raised it through the creation of new historical content open to the public (or is this TMI?).
Other than that, this is another exciting step in a cool project!
Thanks for the typo catch!
I think trying to convey the notion of generating funds by creating content is too challenging for the very first paragraph. But by including Steemit in the second paragraph, we are allowing that this is not the usual crowdfunding scenario. The second contact after their initial response will definitely get into the weeds.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I also struggled with if we should include how we made the money, but I think the right candidate would ask that question. Maybe? I don't know...
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Yeah, that'll be a challenge to explain. But it should not be allowed to stand in the way of the concept. However, it MUST be made clear on the 2nd contact.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit