- Referenda/
- Medium Spender/
- #1239/
[Medium Spender] Referendum #1239 Opt-In Tip for DV Cohort 2 - Saxemberg
- 0.0%
- 0.0%
- 0.0%
Threshold
I'm voting AYE. I author the proposal because I strongly believe in rewarding position engagements in the community, especially since there wasn't any expectation of compensation for DVs.
Should I, as an author, abstain? IMO, I shouldn't, as I'm not financially benefiting from the proposal, and it is just part of the political philosophy I and DAOplomats uphold.
More on our voting principles DAOplomats.com/about.
I appreciate all the voters who segmented the proposal and kept it just about Saxemberg rather than using this proposal to evaluate the entire Cohort 2 DVs.
First and foremost we'd like to thank DAOplomats for engaging with Polkadot and OpenGov. Just like with dapps, governance is always healthy when new blood and energy from other ecosystems also join. This referendum will help us set up a sentiment baseline with other referendum we are planning to launch soon:
Closing the BD bounty (Discussion and counterpart planning)
https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2503
AssetHub logos redo (announcement)
https://x.com/saxemberg/status/1840633498555592782
OpenGov tooling (planned internally)
and a couple others.
We have already connected and we would like to continue to connect deeper with the Cardano ecosystem like Felix has mentioned so this cross-chain momentum for governance can keep growing and new ideas can flourish so seeing governance participants from outside of Polkadot is always a positive and a refreshing experience. So for that thank you and you guys are very welcome.
As for questions, the only one that can be addressed so far is the one posted on ref. 1238 which questioned about operation costs.
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1238#1
So, Saxemberg OpenGov ops does have human costs/R&D, operations costs and infrastructure costs so these can be shown by examples. Obviously human costs are the FTE hours that our analysts have employed. The FTE estimated during cohort 1 was 3, for cohort 2 we still have not produced an estimation. External parties also are hired by the hour, most commonly transcribers/translators/data munching and less often engineers close to us with certain skills. A good example is the Polkadot Ecology Research Institute referendum which had a large volume of new data that had to be processed externally. Infrastructure costs are also increasing just like human costs but thanks to our own infrastructure and housing/collocation with long term contracts we can keep this costs in the low thousands. We just had a referendum with a low traffic website operations in the 100k range so low thousands for data analytics is not a high cost.
Hopefully that clarifies doubts about any operation costs and we’ll just wait for the end of this referendum as there is no more engagement for now.
Voting AYE.
Saxemberg has been a role model for DVs and beyond. I want to add a more outside ecosystem perspective here which ideally highlights a value of Saxemberg beyond polkadot. As a longterm Cardano Ambassador who got quite engaged in Polkadot thingies tho, i am learning a lot from Saxemberg through their activities on Polkadot Governance. Since following Saxemberg closely (and being very impressed by their work) i started to apply learnings to collectives at Cardano Governance. Two heavily engaged cardano open source developer projects for example adapted/adopted Saxembergs voting guidelines:
Next step is to setup processes which draw from Saxembergs expertise as well as from other engaged groups and collectives at OpenGov. However, if the tip here deservs an AYE, then, from a more outside perspective (wearing my Cardano Ambassador hat here) i'd say 100% YES. Saxemberg adds value to blockchain governance beyond polkadot, acts as a role model and establishes a high and desirable level for any governance collectives within and without polkadot..
Ps:
So do others, but here its about Saxemberg XD
Lets send them that tip