Pudgy Party – Bringing the most beloved characters in Web3 to Polkadot

Deciding
Content
AI Summary
Reply
Up
Share
Request
2MUSDC
Status
Decision28d
Confirmation
7d
Attempts
0
Tally
7%Aye
93%Nay
Aye
985.69KDOT
Nay
13.03MDOT
  • 0.0%
  • 0.0%

    Threshold

  • 0.0%
Support
0.02%
356.88KDOT
Issuance
1.6BDOT
Votes
Nested
Flattened
Actions
Or do delegation here, check wiki.
Call
Metadata
Timeline3
Votes Bubble
Curves
Statistics
Comments

Hello hello !!

Thx for this ref which should be heavily discussed in the community for various reasons.

I have 1 quick question and 1 adjustment request:

1/ Quick question
Why didn't you request part of the $MYTH in the Treasury to complete the USDC request?

https://polkadot.dotreasury.com/#/
image.png

👉 They are unused

2/Request for adjustment
The Influencer/Content creator part for $400,000 should be dropped.

We already have:

  • KAITO (paid by the MB)
  • Wagmedia
  • DOTBulls

👉 There is a content creator funding fatigue. There is no clear evidence that there were any ROI for the ecosystem so far. Content creator usually have little skin the game, barely knowing what they are talking about sometimes, using AI a lot.
See Goku's most recent post about it:
https://x.com/0xgoku_/status/1954831315024355415

As I'm a strong supporter of the PlayPudgy game, of Mythos, as i'm a strong believer that this game is going to be a banger for everyone, i strongly disagree the fact of including those $400,000 in the proposal.
There is probably some space for improvement here.

3/ Polkadot's branding in game
I've got the game as an early registered player on my phone, at game's launch:
image.png
and
image.png

👉 Can you guarantee the ecosystem will have a fair exposure at game's launch?
This is the best ad the ecosystem can have, players will make a direct link between the game and the network/infra running on it.
A "Powered by Polkadot" HAS TO be displayed in case the ref passes. This is a basic requirement.
powered_black_pink.png

Thx in advance, hoping the game will be a great success for everyone.

Edited

Reply
Up

i think this is a fantastic opportunity for Polkadot.

this is an opportunity for Polkadot's tech to be shilled by one of the most loved and respected NFT brand/community in Web3.

if you vote NAY please state reasons why so it can be addressed.

Reply
Up 1

Dear Proposer,

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

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

Members expressed mixed views on the proposal. Some believed that funding should have been executed as a marketing bounty rather than a direct grant, arguing that the treasury should not provide a gift in kind without reciprocal benefits. Concerns were raised about the high cost and unclear integration of DOT into the marketing strategy, with demands for detailed mock-ups and practical commitments on DOT branding. While one member appreciated the potential for using the funds to bolster Polkadot’s presence and saw merit in the team’s commitment, the majority deemed the proposal too pricey and lacking clear benefits for Polkadot.

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

TruthDAO vote: NAY

1.	The funding request is presented as a bundled figure, without sufficient detail on why each individual item requires the specified amount.
2.	While the proposal outlines potentially high returns for Polkadot, whether these outcomes can actually be achieved remains uncertain.
3.	Some members view this as part of a recurring “vicious cycle” stemming from past Treasury funding to parachains, which has fostered a sense of competition among teams. In particular, parachains that already have substantial user bases tend to place the community in a difficult position: if not supported, they feel abandoned by Polkadot; if supported, it perpetuates the cycle and reinforces the notion that parachains should rely on the Treasury for development and marketing.
4.	To avoid this dynamic, some members believe the Treasury should return to its original purpose—funding non-profit teams without tokens. Projects that already have tokens and fundraising should be actively developing and marketing to generate returns for their investors, rather than placing a “moral obligation” on the Polkadot Treasury.

We want to emphasize that the Polkadot community is very supportive of Mythical Games and Pudgy Party—as clearly seen through community engagement on X. However, requesting $2M from the Treasury may face resistance. Unless Pudgy Party directly integrates DOT (e.g., by using DOT for transaction fees) to strengthen Polkadot’s utility and visibility, other forms of exposure and marketing risk being short-lived impressions rather than delivering meaningful, lasting impact for the network.

See the full feedback here.

📖Truth DAO Governance Statement

💭 Email: open@truthdao.cn, Telegram

🗳️ Delegate

Reply
Up