Ink!ubator 2.0 – Change of curators for bounty #19

Big Spender
1mo ago
8 Comments
Executed
Content
AI Summary
Reply
Up
Share
Status
Decision28d
Confirmation7d
Attempts
1
Tally
99.2%Aye
50.0%Threshold
0.8%Nay
Aye
44.09MDOT
Nay
345.43KDOT
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%

Threshold

Support0.72%
10.94MDOT
Issuance
1.52BDOT
Votes
Nested
Flattened
Calls
Call
Metadata
Timeline6
Votes Bubble
Statistics
Comments

Dear @Toma Sadova,

Thank you for your proposal. Our vote on this proposal is NAY.

The Big Spender track requires a 60% quorum according to our voting policy. This proposal has received three aye and two nay votes from ten members, with two members abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

The referendum received mixed feedback, with supporters praising the list of curators as trusted and capable of advancing ink! development. However, concerns were raised about past issues with the ink!ubator program, including a lack of professionalism and follow-through, leading some members to oppose the proposal. Others abstained, citing the need for a clearer strategy for broader ink! adoption. One member suggested that the bounty be closed in line with the outcome of referendum 1160 and reopened with a restructured approach.

The full discussion, along with individual members' votes and comments, can be found in our internal voting.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO

Reply
Up