Improved Proposal from Chainalysis to Polkadot

Big Spender
3mos ago
37 Comments
Rejected
  • Content
  • AI Summary
Reply
Up
Share
Request
2.17MUSDC
2.17MUSDC
2.17MUSDC
Status
Decision28d
Confirmation7d
Attempts
5
Will be rejected immediately with over 
0
 nay votes.
Tally
49.9%Aye
50.0%Threshold
50.1%Nay
Aye
105.79MDOT
Nay
106.17MDOT
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%

Threshold

Support(2.20%)
32.31MDOT
Issuance
1.47BDOT
Votes
Nested
Flattened
Calls
  • Call
  • Metadata
  • Timeline13
  • Votes Bubble
  • Statistics
Comments

Are threat actors commonly using Polkadot? How does Polkadot compare to other ecosystems? According to this source, the OFAC does not track any Polkadot addresses. How will this work given that "Detection of sanction activity" is a key deliverable?

image.png

Reply
Up

6.5$m seems like a lot and a bit too early.
We first have to increase demand for Polkadot data and max out all the services that our current providers, like Dune and Token Terminal, are providing.

Reply
Up

Voting NAY

The previously rejected chainalysis proposals received high amount and quality of feedback & suggested improvements from the Polkadot community, yet feedback is continuously ignored by the proposer... not rly improved as the title says

Reply
Up

After carefully evaluating the proposal and the comments that were released on the AAG show I have voted NAY.

Reply
Up

I'm nay,

I'll admit I had lost hope on this one and presumed they would have been smart enough to bring the votes force this through. Maybe I over-estimated their preparedness and cunning.

Riveting to watch this play out.

Reply
Up 1

Does anyone know how Giotto profits monetarily from this proposal?
I doubt he believes this proposal is beneficial for Polkadot.
@CHAINALYSIS : Did you make any arrangements with Giotto—I mean, Michiko-san?

Reply
Up