@dvzrv@chaos.social Would this then not be better addressed by reaching out to NGI/NLNet first, outside of the grants process? Even just to express your concerns.

It seems to touch on a lot of their internal processes, which are difficult to judge for any outsider - and at least from what I've heard, they're decent at communicating with (at least by grant-issuing-organization standards).

It does mention things like "most promising ideas" on pages such as https://www.ngi.eu/opencalls/, implying a subjective selection, though perhaps they're not clear *enough* about that in enough places to really get it across...

The current article seems to be written in a strangely conspiratorial tone, and I don't know that that's going to be conducive towards getting these concerns resolved. It kind of comes across as burying the concrete criticisms in a pile of mostly tangential observations.