Threshold
Saxemberg has voted NAY on the Polkadot referendum 1724 Retroactive Funding for JAM Search. Observation: usually only highly requested and/or highly adopted tooling was scored high.
This referendum is eligible for vote overrule:
https://voting.opensquare.io/space/the-sax-guild/proposal/QmcMbd9Cnwtph9W3bSxqLmER2Ub7kcw9pDaK798UsSfmir
Dear Proposer,
Thank you for your proposal. Our first vote on this proposal is NAY.
The Small Spender track requires 50% participation 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 one aye and three nay votes from eight available members, with one member abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:
Members expressed varied perspectives on the JAM retroactive funding proposal. One voter supported the tool as a useful collaboration aid for JAM implementers. Others opposed the proposal, citing concerns over the tool’s priority, unclear JAM economics, and its relation to DOT, and argued that JAM funding should continue through the established JAM prize budget. An abstaining voter, while generally supportive of increasing JAM awareness among developers, suggested improvements such as a more targeted domain name and clearer benefits for the intended audience. Overall, the discussion reflected a strong preference for established funding channels and greater clarity on economic impacts before further allocation.
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
Our members reviewed their initial vote from NAY to Abstain.
As we all know about the 10M DOT pot for JAM, not all devs than can be useful for JAM implementors are covered by the 10M DOT.
There was the same discussion for the JAM versioning tool at the time.
Considering this, we decided to Abstain.
We think the community should be aware of it: some "extra" JAM devs can't go through the 10M DOT pot.
Any JAM label in OpenGov shouldn't be rejected by the simple assumption: JAM <> OpenGov.
Some tools could deserve to be supported by OpenGov if they improve implementors DevRel UX.
First vote is nay. Although I generally like to support independent builders and projects that add value to the community, this request comes across as more of a short-term solution for a fairly small group of builders. In the longer term, new JAM resources and AI tools may cover much of this functionality without requiring dedicated upkeep. I’d also prefer to see forward-looking proposals submitted onchain first, and only turn to retroactive asks if an initial proposal doesn’t pass but still generates broad support and shows clear value despite the naysayers.
TruthDao vote: NAY
We recognize that this could address a valid need and help the community better understand JAM. However, the current search capabilities are limited — it cannot provide comprehensive answers like AI does — and the timing does not feel appropriate.
In the past, Polkadot has funded several tooling proposals that ultimately saw little adoption, or were later replaced by better alternatives. At this early stage, when adoption is still relatively low and the tool mainly serves a small subset of users, we believe it is unwise to prioritize funding for such initiatives. Otherwise, there is a risk that it will go unused, or even be abandoned within a year.
In addition, it is important to understand how usable this tool truly is, whether it can actually improve JAM developers’ efficiency, and to gather more feedback and support directly from JAM developers.
In conclusion, we do not recommend supporting this proposal at this time.
You can view all of our feedback here.
📖Truth DAO Governance Statement
💭 Email: open@truthdao.cn, Telegram
🗳️ Delegate
MJ here representing PBA Alumni Voting DAO.
Our members voted strongly in favor of this retroactive funding. We recognize that proposals of this nature are not included in the JAM Prize pool and therefore merit our support. We also appreciate that this retroactive proposal is backed by a well-functioning tool, reflecting the expertise of Fluffy Labs, who are well regarded for their JAM Reader and Debugger tooling. We are grateful for this cross-platform searching tool that enhances JAM education, enabling broader access and collaboration as more people engage with JAM’s innovative technologies.
For further enquiries, please reply here or contact alumni@polkadot.academy.
Threshold
Hi,
There is a huge 10M $DOT JAM bounty, why should this work be funded by the Polkadot Treasury?
Thx in advance.