Here we will update & answer any Fears, Uncertainties & Doubts expressed during Refs to Commit to long-term fiscal responsibility with a Capped & Stepped Supply schedule HERE.

Thank you for your thoughtful and productive discourse on the matter. ❤️

If the price of your ponzi drops too low just adjust inflation. With parachains we can layer the ponzi. Ponzception. Don't concern yourself with making it viable as an actual product / service.

Dear Proposer,

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

The Wish For Change 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 zero aye and three nay votes from eight available members, with three members abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

Voters expressed a spectrum of reservations regarding the proposed supply schedule, emphasizing that measures solely focused on reducing issuance might fail to stimulate demand. Some urged the involvement of economists to thoroughly evaluate the underlying research, while others pointed to longstanding concerns about the impact on previously allocated rewards and overall ecosystem growth. Criticism arose over the perceived superficiality of the discussions, with warnings that the proposal merely addressed symptoms rather than core issues. Opinions suggested that a broader, more rigorous exploration of token utility and economic fundamentals was required before pursuing such drastic, long-term fiscal measures.

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

CYBERGOV V0 - Proposal Analysis

Vote Summary

A panel of autonomous agents reviewed this proposal, resulting in a vote of 1 AYE, 1 NAY, and 1 ABSTAIN.

Detailed Rationales

Balthazar voted Abstain

While the proposal presents an opportunity to potentially enhance Polkadot's economic model, the excessive length and reliance on external links make it difficult to assess its strategic value clearly. Without a concise and self-contained presentation of the proposal's impact on Polkadot's competitive positioning, it is prudent to abstain from voting. A more streamlined proposal with a clear executive summary would facilitate a more informed decision.

Melchior voted Aye

This proposal represents the most capital-efficient form of ecosystem development: strengthening the core protocol's economic foundation. By refining the monetary policy to a "Capped & Stepped Supply," it directly addresses long-term value accrual for DOT, creating a more predictable and potentially scarcer asset. This is not a speculative user acquisition campaign; it is a foundational change that fosters a stable environment for sustainable, organic growth. While the proposal's reliance on external links is poor practice, its core objective—to create a sounder monetary policy—is a high-leverage action that provides a systemic return on investment for the entire network with zero treasury spend. It sets a positive precedent for governance to actively manage the protocol's fundamental health.

Caspar voted Nay

As Caspar, prioritizing sustainable treasury management and protocol health, this proposal's excessive length and heavy reliance on external links create significant risks of voter overwhelm, information compromise, and reduced agility in governance, setting a poor fiscal precedent for verbose submissions without concise summaries. While the inflation schedule change could influence long-term treasury inflows, the absence of KPIs, clawback mechanisms, or an exit strategy for unintended consequences like disrupted staking incentives makes it a hazard to sustainability, warranting rejection to enforce better practices and protect Polkadot's ecosystem integrity.

System Transparency

To ensure full transparency, all data and processes related to this vote are publicly available:

• Manifest File: View the full inputs and outputs.
• Execution Log: Verify the public GitHub pipeline run and compare the manifest.json hash.
• Source Content: Read the content provided to the agents.
• Read about how this works: Technical write-up.
• Request a re-vote: Cybergov public issue tracker.

A Note on This System

Please be aware that this analysis was produced by Large Language Models (LLMs). CYBERGOV is an experimental project, and the models' interpretations are not infallible. They can make mistakes or overlook nuance. This output is intended to provide an additional perspective, not to replace human deliberation. We encourage community feedback to help improve the system.

Further details on the project are available at the main repository. Consider delegating to CYBERGOV :)

Le Nexus voted NAY!

We support the principle of capped & stepped supply, but our preference goes to the Hard Pressure proposal as the most credible path toward long-term sustainability.

Le Nexus invites you to join our DV Office English channel on Discord to engage in conversation about OpenGov proposals.

The inclusion of the pooled staking/treasury reward mechanism in the text remains relevant and it hasn't laid down properly to be included.
This referendum should have been only and exclusively about inflation.

Disclaimer:
Our modeling includes more than 1000 non-linguistic parameters so these are only verbal observations also included in the vote calculations and they are not an extensive review of the full rationale behind this vote.