OG Rust Bounties

Big Spender
1mo ago
10 Comments
Executed
Content
AI Summary
Reply
Up
Share
Status
Decision28d
Confirmation7d
Attempts
1
Tally
99.4%Aye
50.0%Threshold
0.6%Nay
Aye
45.6MDOT
Nay
286.45KDOT
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%

Threshold

Support0.74%
11.33MDOT
Issuance
1.53BDOT
Votes
Nested
Flattened
Calls
Call
Metadata
Timeline6
Votes Bubble
Statistics
Comments

Thanks for the bounty description.

We would like to have a concrete time set for future refills and a time frame for fund use. This requirement is now is also a part of the bounty compliance standard set by referendum 1254. Paragraph 2 section 2
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1254
so early refills are discouraged at this point, attempting to comply with the requested amounts at the previously announced dates is encouraged. In short, announcing a spend period is now required in order to avoid early refills or surprise refills. Also, to help with budgeting in the future. In addition we also would like to add that a setting a spending time also makes it hard for bounties to become abandoned or too reactive to external factors as we've seen with bounty 39 and 27 (for now). Regardless of that, a time frame set with a range should also work but never has been attempted before. Other variations of an announced time frame should work too as long as they are reasonable time frames (so nothing vague like: "from 1 month to 100 years").
The deplete and request approach or fund and wait approach for bounties is something we really dislike as it has proven to be a detrimental approach for the treasury on previous bounties. So we really would like to see a refill or use determined by this bounty and all bounties from now on.

Also, make sure to abide by the Paragraph 5 which now requires an additional work by bounties such as opening communication channels, points of contact and present summaries a quarterly financial report, monthly progress summary along with other expected or unexpected changes in the bounty starting from approval time. So these items should be required in addition to or instead of the 6 month community report proposed by this bounty.

Reply
Up

Can this be integrated with https://www.morekudos.com/? where teams in the substrate/polkadot space can tag features requests/github issues that they dont have time do with a bounty reward? to get more devs in the door?

Reply
Up

Dear @cl0w,

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

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

The referendum received mixed feedback, with many members supporting the bounty for addressing a key issue in attracting developers to the ecosystem. Supporters praised the experienced curators and the focus on solving real problems, emphasising the potential for faster development and deployment. However, several members abstained, citing concerns about the lack of clear plans, preliminary preparation, and the potential for the bounty to create a gatekeeping mechanism. One member opposed the proposal, questioning the value delivered by the curators and the high funding request. Overall, while the concept was widely acknowledged as valuable, concerns about execution and governance led to a cautious response.

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

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO

Reply
Up