Threshold
Do you have previous experience building products or participating in the Polkadot ecosystem that you can share?
PolkaWorld voted NAY.
The entire team opposed the proposal, with some of the main reasons being:
For more detailed feedback, please visit here.
Dear Proposer,
Thank you for your proposal. Our first vote on this proposal is NAY.
The Medium Spender track requires 50% quorum and simple majority of non-abstain voters according to our voting policy v0.2, and any referendum in which the majority of members vote abstain receives an abstain vote. This proposal has received zero aye and six nay votes from ten available members. Below is a summary of our members' comments:
The voters expressed strong opposition to a proposal involving funding for an anonymous team. Concerns centered around the appropriateness of establishing a bounty and the lack of transparency regarding the team's identity. Many believed that the funding structure should resemble a standard treasury proposal, as previous investments in anonymous foundations had not yielded satisfactory returns for the community. Overall, the voters felt that the proposal failed to align with community interests and lacked clarity on how the funds would be utilized.
The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.
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
💬 Public Telegram
🌐️ Web
🐦 Twitter
🗳️ Delegate
Truth DAO voted NAY.
From the proposal, it appears that the team lacks a clear understanding of the Polkadot ecosystem.
The development path seems to rely heavily on JAM, but with no clear roadmap for JAM at the moment, it’s difficult to see how this initiative could realistically be delivered. We hope to reassess once the proposal has gone through significant improvements.
Additionally, the team members and their backgrounds are unclear, making it difficult to evaluate whether they have the capability to achieve the stated goals.
The budget lacks transparency, with insufficient breakdowns of key elements such as team composition, role responsibilities, development timelines for each feature, and the salary structure.
Finally, the proposal does not clearly outline what specific value it brings to Polkadot. Is this fund part of the Polkadot DAO? Will future returns flow back to the Treasury? How will the fund be replenished? And how will user assets be safeguarded?
You can view the full feedback here.
📖Truth DAO Governance Statement
🗳️ Delegate
Edited
Hello,
1- why do you need a Bounty structure ?
It looks like the proposal is to fund a single project entirely
2- Who are you?
What are the people working on this index?
Who are the points if contact or this proposal?
3- Where will you deploy this smart contract?
So if the Treasury pays everything, takes 100% of the risk, does this foundation belong to the Treasury in the end?
Please explain what are the benefits for the community here.
Is the Treasury receiving dividends/profits at some point?
Thx in advance.
Edited