PolkaWorld voted NAY

Unanimous opposition.

It’s the same recurring concern — the Treasury is once again acting like an investor, but without receiving any return. The team clearly stated in the proposal that they won’t issue a token, nor did they mention any potential future business model.

Yet, this project is not a public good. Treasury funds are being used, but the project itself doesn’t belong to the Polkadot DAO. Overall, the project structure feels a bit messy.

This is a startup project and would be more suitable for VC funding. We suggest trying to raise investment from firms like HIC.

We recommend clarifying these issues before applying for Treasury funding again.

Read all feedback [here](https://southern-manicure-6ee.notion.site/1593-WAGOI-Opportunity-to-put-web3-at-the-heart-of-Europe-s-data-economy-20aa3c644fba806e8619fea8cfb02648?source=copy_link).

[@polkaworld](12mP4sjCfKbDyMRAEyLpkeHeoYtS5USY4x34n9NMwQrcEyoh-polkadot) If this project succeeds, it will bring a lot of core time usage, as stated in their proposal. This is what Polkadot needs. I believe there is a misconception that the Treasurary should only support infrastructure level / public goods projects. The Treasury already supports a bunch of different initiatives that are not related to public goods. I know we can't support all startup / venture proposals, but yes we could choose some to make a bet. In my opinion, this one seems to be a good balance in terms of cost / return 

**OG Tracker Rating 3/3**

**Clear display of deliverables✅**
- Blockchain Infrastructure: Develop the core blockchain components, including smart contracts for data sharing and monetization.
- Mobile App: Create a user-friendly mobile app for data visualization and consent management.
- Regulatory Compliance: Ensure the platform aligns with the EU Data Act, GDPR, and GAIA-X standards.
- Car API’s Integration: Launch a beta version with Tesla integration and onboard early users.

**Clear display of a valid direct point of contact ✅**
- Linkedin: [https://www.linkedin.com/in/marioschraepen/](https://www.linkedin.com/in/marioschraepen/)

Clear display of proposal’s duration✅
- The duration of this proposal spans from July 2025 to December 2025.

_OGT Rating aims to help voters make better informed decisions and direct proposers towards certain common-good practices. We are providing feedback based on 3 simple yet crucial criteria which we believe should be included in every OpenGov referenda._

After our second round of internal discussion, we’ve decided to maintain our **NAY** vote at this time.

It seems there are currently two prevailing interpretations of what “return on investment” means for the Polkadot Treasury:

1.	Token-based return – a financial return in the traditional sense
2.	On-chain activity return – a form of soft return through increased wallet growth and transaction volume

While we agree that driving more wallets and transactions to Polkadot is indeed a form of return, it also directly benefits the proposer’s own project. This raises a key question: How can we ensure the project truly belongs to the Polkadot DAO in the long run? As it stands, the project remains under the control of the proposal team.

Moreover, the proposal does not clearly outline the project’s long-term plan — will it rely on Treasury support indefinitely? These are important questions that need to be addressed. This is also why we emphasize the importance of a clear and sustainable business model.

Our recommendations:

1.	Clarify the project’s relationship with the Polkadot DAO
2.	Clarify the long-term plan — will the project continue to rely on Treasury grants indefinitely?

We appreciate your efforts and remain open to continued dialogue.

Find all feedback [here](https://southern-manicure-6ee.notion.site/1593-WAGOI-Opportunity-to-put-web3-at-the-heart-of-Europe-s-data-economy-20aa3c644fba806e8619fea8cfb02648?source=copy_link).

From the team’s response, we clearly understand their position regarding whether they plan to continue seeking Treasury funding in the future. Based on that, we view this round of Treasury support as a way to assist the project through its early-stage launch on Polkadot.

We do have one final question we hope the team can clarify:
Will a portion of the project’s future revenue be shared with the Treasury?

Thank you for your strong and direct response! If you could incorporate the points about “proving it can be done first, then scaling together, and eventually sharing future revenue with the Treasury” into the proposal, we would be happy to reconsider our vote.

Might as well just put a Polkadot jersey on Messi — these proposals nowadays are nothing but schemes to scam money from the treasury.

With 660K USDT, I could deploy bots to massively fake on-chain activity — I could even sweep up all the Coretime. Way more effective than your crappy project.

Dear Proposer,

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

The **Big Spender** track requires **60% quorum** 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 **one aye and zero nay** votes from **ten available members**, with **six members abstaining**. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

> One voter expressed strong support for a proposal aimed at utilizing Polkadot technology to enhance public services in the EU, highlighting its potential to foster decentralized networks and infrastructure. Meanwhile, several voters chose to abstain, citing concerns such as perceived conflicts of interest, the proposer's lack of a proven track record, and uncertainty regarding the proposal's tangible benefits to the Polkadot ecosystem. Despite their reservations, some expressed a willingness to support future initiatives that demonstrate clear value and successful milestones.

The full discussion can be found in our [internal voting](https://voting.opensquare.io/space/permanence/proposal/Qmae9LYxszkVrLYKnEG6j5yE2W92QvwYaMS8SiUPao3duL).

Please feel free to contact us through the links below for further discussion. **DISCLAIMER:** Our Decentralized Voices delegation voted to abstain on this referendum in accordance with our conflict of interest policy, [announced](https://x.com/PermanenceDAO/status/1905223487976783987) on the 27th of March, 2025.

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)

Truth DAO votes NAY

While the proposal carries strong strategic potential, its core assumptions — including OEM participation, user engagement, and technical readiness — appear overly optimistic. It also lacks substantial risk mitigation mechanisms.

Given the current uncertainties around the detailed implementation of the EU Data Act and the unclear stance of automotive manufacturers, allocating $660K in high-risk funding at this stage could place an unnecessary burden on the ecosystem.

We recommend postponing the grant until the legislation takes effect and a more realistic assessment can be made based on the actual regulatory landscape.

📎 Full feedback available [here](https://voting.opensquare.io/space/truthdao/proposal/QmWvhom6X9mf1TgNEdXrrzbpYEx58icwFDv7rqsmX8zCSz?page=last).

📖[Truth DAO Governance Statement](https://southern-manicure-6ee.notion.site/Truth-DAO-Manifesto-0-0-1-1e9a3c644fba807fb88ef3eb5adc711b?pvs=4)

💭 Contact: [Email](open@truthdao.cn), [Telegram](https://t.me/truthdao_public)

🗳️ [Delegate](https://polkadot.subsquare.io/user/13dVYCGL27HhTWaAby3gAVPQkSqbGAyHQfdeUxsttDZi6afh/posted/referenda)

After four rounds of internal discussion, PolkaWorld has decided to vote **AYE**.

All of our concerns have now been addressed. The team has agreed to return a portion of potential future revenue to the Treasury. While this commitment is not reflected in the proposal text itself, it has been publicly stated in the comment section and can be referenced there.

We encourage the community to follow the progress of this project closely, as it has the potential to bring more on-chain activity and future value to the Polkadot ecosystem.

You can find PolkaWorld’s full discussion and feedback [[here](https://southern-manicure-6ee.notion.site/1593-WAGOI-Opportunity-to-put-web3-at-the-heart-of-Europe-s-data-economy-20aa3c644fba806e8619fea8cfb02648?source=copy_link)].

✅ Why vote YES
• Real-world use case with regulatory tailwinds: Aligned with the EU Data Act (enforceable Nov 2025), WAGOI puts Polkadot at the core of a $750B+ market.
• Consumer-first product: Empowers drivers to own, manage, and monetize their vehicle data using a mobile app backed by Polkadot infrastructure.
• Traction already visible: 1,000+ waitlist signups, 10+ Letters of Intent, C-level advisory board, and industry partnerships in progress.
• Strong on-chain potential: Forecast of 15M–20M tx/month in 2026, creating continuous smart contract activity and wallet engagement.
• Strategic visibility in Europe: Success could position Polkadot as the go-to Web3 standard for compliant data infrastructure.

⸻

❌ Why vote NO
• High cost: $660,000 may seem high for a 6-month cycle, especially if early KPIs aren’t met.
• Execution risk: Heavy reliance on timely regulation rollout (EU Data Act), and real-world adoption may lag projections.
• Limited immediate ecosystem ties: Aside from using Polkadot infrastructure, current integration with existing parachains or tools is not fully detailed.
• Product not yet launched: While the concept and partners are real, the MVP isn’t live — success is still hypothetical.
• B2B2C is ambitious: Requires strong partnerships and trust from large incumbents — not guaranteed.

⸻

🎯 A bold and timely attempt to make Polkadot the backbone of Europe’s data economy — with real compliance, real industry use, and major on-chain growth potential. High-reward, but not without execution risk.

While we appreciate the submission of the second proposal for this project, our DAO members have maintained the position established during the evaluation of the original proposal earlier this year. Among the Nay voters, the prevailing concerns center around what they perceive as 'regulatory fluff' attached to an extremely ambitious promise, coupled with a significant upfront funding request. These concerns are amplified by the team's limited track record of past deliveries or tangible evidence to substantiate their claims.
There is also a shared concern that this initiative may ultimately result in Treasury funds being spent on a product with little to no meaningful impact on the broader ecosystem. In light of these factors, 66.67% of our members have decided to vote Nay on this proposal. 
REEEEEEEEEE DAO. 

calls

Rejected

Submitted

DecisionDepositPlaced

DecisionStarted

big_spender

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

small_spender

medium_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.

***