KWIT - mobile payment wallet

Medium Spender
7d ago
5 Comments
Deciding
Content
AI Summary
Reply
Up
Share
Request
334KUSDT
Status
Decision28d
Confirmation4d
Attempts
0
Tally
3.2%Aye
96.8%Nay
Aye
1.19MDOT
Nay
36.3MDOT
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%

Threshold

Support0.02%
305.08KDOT
Issuance
1.52BDOT
Votes
Nested
Flattened
Calls
Call
Metadata
Timeline3
Votes Bubble
Statistics
Comments

Echoing the comment made by Mario @MarioSchraepen . Referendum 493 proposed to create a service remittance called Litesend
https://litesend.com/
in addition to a marketing campaign with 55k USD (28% of the proposal cost) as well as the acquisition of new partners and new jurisdictions to operate in 88k USD (45% of proposal cost). Reporting these items should be encouraged before creating a new referendum. The status of these two integrations which combined are 73% of the previously approved referendum should be reported to OpenGov (referendum 493 on OGTracker doesn’t include the new jurisdictions and new partners integration https://app.ogtracker.io/mediumSpender/493?tab=progress OGTracker).
These Items that seem missing and the lack of a Polkadot or Litesend appearance on the previously announced conference or Electrocoin panelists on “Money Motion 2024”
https://2024.money-motion.eu/speakers-2024/
or in the startup stage
https://2024.money-motion.eu/startups/
is something that should be properly explained.

Our emphasis for now is on reports about the new jurisdiction and partner acquisition which seems completely missing from referendum 493 and detailed reports of these marketing efforts which have not been produced or reported to the extent expected. There are other items that caught our attention like the lack of integration of USDC/T on Assethub on the Electrocoin site as well
https://electrocoin.eu/en
something that the treasure didn't pay for but also something that doesn't show much interest in the ecosystem as a whole from our perspective.

For those reasons we will vote and remain NAY.

Reply
Up 1