CLARYS.AI Beta Product Development

Deciding
Content
AI Summary
Reply
Up
Share
Request
129KUSDC
127.1KUSDC
Status
Decision28d
Confirmation
4d
Attempts
0
Tally
0.4%Aye
99.6%Nay
Aye
210.19KDOT
Nay
46.5MDOT
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%

    Threshold

  • 0.0%
Support
0.01%
146.77KDOT
Issuance
1.59BDOT
Votes
Nested
Flattened
Actions
Or do delegation here, check wiki.
Call
Metadata
Timeline3
Votes Bubble
Statistics
Comments

PolkaWorld votes NAY

While Clarys.AI presents an appealing value proposition for improving governance efficiency, we believe the Polkadot Treasury is currently not in a position to fund such general-purpose AI tools—neither in terms of priorities nor readiness. There are also doubts about whether the product will ultimately see real adoption. We suggest the team first complete a working prototype with support from the Web3 Foundation, gather more user feedback, and then consider applying for retrospective funding.

See full feedback here.

Reply
Up

Hey,
is the model for Clary's LLM open source? Can i run the model locally with ollama? It says in the proposal: "OpenAI gpt-4o", is the llm backend chatgpt or do you guys have some custom fine tuned model I can use locally?

Reply
Up

Dear Proposer,

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

The Medium Spender track requires 50% quorum (at least 5 aye votes) and simple majority of non-abstain votes 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 three aye and three nay votes from ten available members, with three members abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

Supporters had appreciated the potential of the tool in reducing workload and streamlining governance research by offering a specialized AI for OpenGov, praising its ability to integrate off-chain data and the team’s track record. Others raised concerns about the funding structure, advocating for milestone-based payments over scheduled ones to better gauge the product’s effectiveness. Several voters preferred to see a live version or further developed MVP to allow community feedback and assess whether the expected benefits matched the proposed ROI. Overall, the debate highlighted both the promise of enhanced governance decision-making and the need for more concrete deliverables before long-term commitment.

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

Reply
Up

Hopefully, Polkadot reconsiders the increasing importance of Ai in onchain governance. Needless to say there are other ecosystems who are already trying this exact approach
https://medium.com/@nearcommunitysquad/near-governance-101-house-of-stake-378ef7aa3c0f
In a nutshell, AI assistants (AI to human) and AI delegates (AI to governance/DAO) are a governance research path.
That's why we support this referendum as it is a path where the common onchain governance issues get dealt with.

Reply
Up

Hi Zoe,

If the MVP is already ready, could you please indicate the development timeframe for a stable production version? Thanks =)

Reply
Up

TruthDAO voted NAY

The product can’t be registered for trial at the moment. While AI can currently serve as a helper tool to speed up proposal browsing and summarization, it’s still far from being able to make decisions on its own. If the team updates the demo and offers a trial, we’d consider revisiting our vote after testing it.

See all feedback here.

📖Truth DAO Governance Statement

💭 Email: open@truthdao.cn, Telegram

🗳️ Delegate

Reply
Up