Hi [@Open 4 Blockchain](/user/15XYpbsSTukHuqM5hLfmJQvpuG4XWPLFZUzZMCfwoTm5spE6),

I agree that it's necessary that the proposers include the PDF files and their hashes in the proposal, but it is basically free to do it on IPFS, and both myself and some others have already been applying this practice in our proposals. You are proposing to charge the treasury for interfacing with free services, and on top of that you're planning to charge the community further for the use of the services:

> To access the API, users will be required to transfer DOT tokens to a smart contract, which will divide the transfer into two parts: one portion for the Polkadot network and another for the certification distributor to cover the service costs.

Totally unnecessary. Any proposer can already do it for free. It's just a matter of enforcement by the community. If we want to include it in the workflows of Subsquare or Polkassembly, then those teams should be funded to implement this feature.

Nay.

Best,
kukabi | Helikon

[@🏔 HELIKON 🏔](15fTH34bbKGMUjF1bLmTqxPYgpg481imThwhWcQfCyktyBzL-polkadot) 
Thank you, Kukabi.

You’re right that it can be done manually and for free, but then it wouldn’t be integrated into the platform itself—which is what we’re after, so everything is transparent for all users—and it also wouldn’t be mandatory, which is another requirement.

Moreover, if that responsibility stays with the users, there’s still no guarantee the files won’t be altered, so we’re back to square one.

I agree the practice you’re following is a good one, and if you don’t think this change is necessary, that’s fine; we just see it as a crucial step toward greater accuracy and assurance for the projects.

As an added benefit, with what we’re proposing, we’re not only certifying a document, we’re preserving the project’s full traceability throughout every stage of its submission process.

Thanks for your input.

PolkaWorld votes NAY on this proposal.

1.	From Polkadot’s perspective, this is not an urgent or high-priority need. Additionally, PolkaWorld would like to strongly recommend that all proposers publish the full content of their proposals on-chain in the future. We also suggest that Polkassembly and Opensquare develop a tagging feature to categorize proposals. This would greatly support treasury fund classification and help establish a clearer prioritization framework.

2.	The Budgets section of this proposal is overly simplistic and lacks necessary detail. A proper and transparent budget should include: milestones, development functions and descriptions, involved personnel (by role), estimated time per role, and respective hourly rates.

Dear Proposer,

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

The **Small Spender** track requires **50% participation and simple majority of non-abstain voters** according to our [voting policy v0.2](https://docs.permanence.io/voting_policy/voting_policy_v0.2.html), and any referendum in which the **majority of members vote abstain receives an abstain vote**. This proposal has received **zero aye and five nay** votes from **ten available members**, with **two members abstaining**. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

> Several voters expressed their skepticism and concerns about the proposed solution, primarily focusing on its necessity and effectiveness. Many believed that the functionalities outlined were already available but underutilized by proposers, suggesting that a more efficient approach could be achieved without the new proposal. Others raised questions about the operational aspects, such as costs and hosting, while some remained neutral, feeling uncertain but leaning towards opposition. Overall, the feedback highlighted a significant level of doubt regarding the proposal's value and execution.

The full discussion can be found in our [internal voting](https://voting.opensquare.io/space/permanence/proposal/QmVtUjt375puCSnrS3WxXUTmD5Qvw3LWZMn8n6vJfi99AE).

Please feel free to contact us through the links below for further discussion.

Kind regards, Permanence DAO Decentralized Voices Cohort IV Delegate 📅 [Book Office Hours](https://cal.com/permanencedao/office-hours) 💬 [Public Telegram](https://t.me/permanencedao) 🌐️ [Web](https://permanence.io) 🐦 [Twitter](https://twitter.com/permanencedao) 🗳️ [Delegate](https://polkadot.subsquare.io/user/15ubZj6T7NUYyQw6j4XBkEMJ2vew5w9kqKEcN1QG7Z1weKDV/votes)

This is already possible RIGHT NOW, we just need to tell UIs to use it.

We propose the integration of a certification system that ensures the authenticity and immutability of proposal documents. This system would function by verifying that documents remain unchanged from their original state and would provide an alert system that tracks any modifications, indicating when and what content was altered. This solution would guarantee the initial conditions of the approved proposals and offer an additional layer of transparency. By implementing this system, we can secure the sovereignty of the proposal process within the treasury, ensuring that all parties involved can trust that the documents reflect the agreed terms without unauthorized tampering.

To read full proposal [click here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AhPUbYhr_yhvoK4t6BMEuCnTwzu4ejpx/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=115616552770012144052&rtpof=true&sd=true)

A certification system is suggested to make sure proposal documents are real and cannot be changed. This system checks if the documents stay the same as when they were first made and tells us if any changes are made, showing when and what was changed. This helps to keep the proposal process safe and makes sure everyone can trust that the documents show the agreed terms without any changes made without permission.

assetKind

amount

beneficiary

validFrom

Rejected

Submitted

DecisionStarted

DecisionDepositPlaced

small_spender

Google Drive Document Integrity and Certification System for Secure Proposals

root

whitelisted_caller

wish_for_change

staking_admin

treasurer

lease_admin

fellowship_admin

general_admin

auction_admin

referendum_canceller

referendum_killer

small_tipper

big_tipper

medium_spender

big_spender

Origin able to dispatch a whitelisted call.

Origin for signaling that the network wishes for some change

Origin able to cancel slashes and manage minimum commission.

Origin for spending up to 10,000,000 DOT from the treasury as well as generally administering it.

Origin for managing the composition of the fellowship.

Origin able to spend around 250 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 1,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 10,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 100,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend up to 1,000,000 DOT from the treasury at once.