Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — ZCG Grant Proposal

1. Executive summary and decision snapshot

Zcash Türkiye requests $27,000 for a ten-university pilot led by Batuhan, with A.bulut7777 and Mutlu supporting content, operations, and wallet onboarding. Targets are approximately 915 students, 700 Zodl wallet setups, and at least 550 shielded transactions. The application remains under review.[1]

Funding structure: all $27,000 upfront, with one $0 milestone and subsequent reporting commitments.[9] The strongest capability evidence is the team’s prior Istanbul Blockchain Week report, documenting substantial attendance and registrations, although incentive delivery encountered problems.[16]

Decision framing—inference: the central trade-off is credible local event experience versus unproven sustained adoption at this scale. Payment protection, scheduling, measurement quality, and incremental value over existing community work warrant particular attention.[8][9][16]

2. Applicant and team track record

Batuhan reports over six years in cryptocurrency and more than a year with Zcash Türkiye. A.bulut7777 reports programming, event, and media experience; Mutlu is assigned field logistics and hands-on onboarding.[1]

The clearest operational evidence is applicant-reported Istanbul Blockchain Week performance: 194 unique QR registrations, over 250 stand visitors, and over 60 Telegram connections. The same report disclosed incomplete reward distribution because of technical-infrastructure and supply constraints. Evidence confirming subsequent distribution: No grounded evidence found.[16]

Separately, ZCG’s May 2025 approval discussion cited positive Turkish-community survey feedback about the team’s content. This supports perceived educational value, not demonstrated wallet retention.[21]

Independently verified sustained-use outcomes from the cited activities: No grounded evidence found.[12][16][21]

3. Proposal scope, milestones, budget, technical approach, and dependencies

The tour combines Zcash education, wallet-security instruction, student-controlled Zodl setup, incentivized first transactions, quizzes, and networking. Deliverables include ten campus representatives, event reports within three days, photos/videos, a final measurement report, and an online follow-up event one month after the tour. University clubs provide venues, recruitment, and local organization.[6]

Budget: transportation $3,000; accommodation $3,500; onboarding and quiz incentives $4,500; merchandise $6,500; operations/coordination $4,000; team compensation $5,500. Hardware/software costs are zero. Incentives comprise 700 × $5 plus $1,000 in quiz rewards; operations include refreshments, club support, and contingency.[7][8]

Material schedule inconsistency: the milestone specifies October 25, 2026, while the narrative extends events into November and sets final reporting for November 25. The October 6 update anticipated delaying an October 16 start. Accommodation assumes approximately 15 field-travel days. These dates and assumptions do not establish one reliable acceptance schedule.[7][9]

The applicant reports university interest and ongoing contact, but firm campus bookings and dated commitments: No grounded evidence found.[1][9]

4. Community discussion, arguments, responses, and resolution

• Strongest support: Roosevelt Gordones argued universities could produce future users, developers, and collaborators. Batuhan cited an earlier Rlay mini-hackathon with approximately 50–60 participants and ten projects as evidence of students’ building potential. These are an endorsement and an applicant-reported result, respectively—not proof of future adoption.[9][12]
• Strongest substantive objection: Sonnie questioned whether a global campus initiative would duplicate regional work or place one regional team in a coordinating gatekeeper role.[11]
• Response: Batuhan clarified that the proposed network would be student-focused, decentralized, complementary to regional communities, and not requesting funding for Telegram administration.[12]
• Resolution: Sonnie accepted that distinction provided the network remained open and complementary; Batuhan explicitly agreed. The governance disagreement was resolved in principle. Detailed implementation was not demonstrated, but the supplied exchange shows no remaining explicit opposition on that point.[13]

5. Relevant precedents and documented outcomes

Zcash Türkiye RLAY HUB Event — $6,870, approved. This is the closest precedent: the same team proposed wallet onboarding, a technical presentation, and a hackathon targeting students and developers. Committee members cited confidence in prior delivery and a low budget; one questioned limited information about the event. The applicant subsequently reported ten projects from its mini-hackathon. This supports event-execution capability, but project quality and continued development are not documented here.[17][12]

Taking Zcash to the Streets: Education & Real-World Feedback in Türkiye — $6,955, declined. This is relevant as another Turkish education-and-incentives proposal. ZCG wanted an example episode and evidence the format could sustain interest before upfront funding; members also questioned added value against existing content. Inference: the applicable lesson is to test distinctive value and delivery quality, not to treat Turkish outreach itself as disfavored.[22]

6. Material risks and execution considerations

• Delivery concentration—inference: university scheduling, weather, transport, and variable attendance could disrupt a multi-city tour. The applicant proposes flexible travel and hands-on support, but these measures do not guarantee the target audience or transaction conversion.[8]
• Adoption measurement—inference: incentivized installations and first transactions measure initial participation, not continued use. Campus representatives and follow-up could improve retention, but their effectiveness remains prospective.[6][7]
• Value sensitivity—calculation: at full target achievement, the total request equals approximately $29.51 per student, $38.57 per wallet setup, or $49.09 per shielded transaction. These are alternative whole-budget ratios, not additive costs or observed outcomes; underperformance raises them.[1]
• Budget discretion—inference: merchandise is approximately 24% of the request, while operations combines several uses. Those allocations are important levers when assessing whether spending chiefly advances onboarding or visibility.[7]

7. Material gaps and questions for the applicant

• Payment protection: what minimum amount is genuinely needed before travel, and could later payments depend on confirmed bookings, early-event results, and final acceptance? What happens to unused funds?[9]
• Executable itinerary: which ten universities have committed, and what revised dates, travel days, contingency arrangements, and completion criteria should govern the grant?[7][9]
• Measurement: how will unique students, completed setups, and shielded transactions be verified without exposing sensitive wallet information? What 30- or 90-day retention measure would distinguish ongoing use from incentive collection?[6][7]
• Budget value: can supplier quotations and a breakdown of club support, refreshments, and contingency substantiate costs? What outcomes would change under a lower-merchandise option?[7]
• Additionality and sustainability: which compensation and follow-up activities are outside existing funding? What funds the proposed approximately $100 monthly university-club support, and for how long?[8][12]
• Operational readiness: what changed after the earlier reward-distribution delay, and what tested fallback will support onboarding if technical infrastructure fails during an event?[16]

8. Neutral decision considerations

Inference: a committee assessment can distinguish confidence in the team’s ability to organize events from confidence in durable adoption. The former has supporting experience and favorable prior committee assessments; the latter requires stronger measurement and follow-up evidence.[16][17]

Without prejudging the decision, possible funding conditions include a confirmed itinerary, milestone-linked disbursement, explicit transaction-verification standards, a retention checkpoint, and separation of tour costs from ongoing community obligations. A smaller initial tranche could test delivery before committing all funds, while recognizing the applicant’s stated need for advance bookings and bulk purchases.[8][9]

9. Numbered source list

• [1] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — ZCG Grant Proposal — https://github.com/ZcashCommunityGrants/zcashcommunitygrants/issues/449
• [9] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — posts 1–5, part 6 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-turkiye-university-tour-2026/57848/1
• [16] Zcash Marketing at Istanbul Blockchain Week & Community Activation — posts 16–20, part 2 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-marketing-at-istanbul-blockchain-week-community-activation/55271/17
• [8] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — posts 1–5, part 5 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-turkiye-university-tour-2026/57848/1
• [21] Zcash Global Turkiye Q2 — comparison summary — https://github.com/ZcashCommunityGrants/zcashcommunitygrants/issues/38
• [12] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — posts 6–10, part 2 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-turkiye-university-tour-2026/57848/10
• [6] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — posts 1–5, part 3 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-turkiye-university-tour-2026/57848/1
• [7] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — posts 1–5, part 4 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-turkiye-university-tour-2026/57848/1
• [11] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — posts 6–10, part 1 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-turkiye-university-tour-2026/57848/6
• [13] Zcash Türkiye University Tour 2026 — posts 11–15 — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-turkiye-university-tour-2026/57848/11
• [17] Zcash Turkiye RLAY HUB Event - decision minutes — https://forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/zcash-community-grants-zcg-meeting-minutes-7-20-2026/56763
• [22] Taking Zcash to the Streets: Education & Real-World Feedback in Türkiye — comparison summary — https://github.com/ZcashCommunityGrants/zcashcommunitygrants/issues/401