WAGOI – Opportunity to put web3 at the heart of Europe’s data economy.

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.

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/

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.

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.