Origin for signaling that the network wishes for some change

wish_for_change

- The proposal defines Polkadot 2.0 around the concept of Coretime.
- Polkadot 2.0 will include three main features: Agile Coretime, Async Backing, and Elastic Scaling.
- Agile Coretime lets parachains get and use coretime more easily.
- Async Backing allows parachains to send blocks to the main Polkadot chain more flexibly.
- Elastic Scaling gives parachains the ability to use extra resources when needed. 
- If accepted, the first version with these features will be called Polkadot 2.0.
- The Technical Fellowship will decide on the details and timing of these features.

Executed

WHO: The stakeholders voting AYE on this proposal.

WHAT: Define Polkadot 2.0 with three epic features - Agile Coretime, Async Backing, and Elastic Scaling.

PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified.

Polkadot 2.0 Definition

TimedOut

VOTE NAY

- A new track called "Express Lane" is suggested to help important proposals.
- This track will prevent spam from less important proposals in the root track.
- The root track only has one spot, making it hard for important ideas to be seen.
- The Express Lane will have 3 spots and require a big deposit of 25,000 DOT to use.
- This way, only real DOT holders can vote on important things.
- The goal is to make sure important proposals don’t get lost. 
- It’s a better option compared to the treasury track, which is easier to spam.

Rejected

WHO: Proposal author
WHAT: Creation of an "Express Lane" track to allow important proposals to be immune from DV (or delegations in general) and prevent spamming of root track
PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Decision deposit of 25,000 DOT, 3 slots, and no reduction in power of DV. No specific mention of price or timeframe.

Express Lane

- A long 7-day confirmation period for referendums can let people vote "no" quickly to stop it, which wasn't as easy when the period was only 24 hours.
- The confirmation period is meant to stop people from waiting until the last day to vote "yes" and win quickly.
- A 7-day confirmation helps stop "yes" sniping but makes "no" sniping easier and slows the process.
- The solution is to adjust the voting timeline so that a referendum can pass by day 21, allowing 7 days for confirmation without giving "no" snipers an advantage.
- This way, even if a "no" vote happens, there’s still time for "yes" votes before the referendum ends on day 28.
- For medium-spender referendums, the same idea applies: adjust the timeline so the last 4 days of confirmation overlap with the last 4 days of the 28-day period.
- This ensures fairness and avoids delays in the referendum process.

Proposal: Adjust the curves of referendums affected by extended confirmation periods. Pass with 50%+ and any support on day 21 instead of day 28 to avoid sniping. Adjust medium spender threshold to 50%+ on day 24. Resources required: not specified.

Changing the curves of the referendums that were affected by extended confirmation periods

**Summary:**

- Users can nominate projects with their DOT tokens.
- Nominated projects receive funding from a constant stream of DOT taken from inflation.
- Funding is distributed based on the proportion of DOT used to nominate each project.
- Full details are available in a Google Docs document or an IPFS-saved PDF.
- There is a Telegram discussion group for this proposal: @parachainstaking.

**WHO:** Parachainstaking

**WHAT:** Allow users to nominate whitelisted projects with DOT, funded by a constant stream of DOT taken from inflation and distributed to projects based on the proportion of DOT that has nominated them.

**PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES:** Not specified.

Implement Optimistic Project Funding

- Inflation is too high, making it hard for new people to join.
- A good idea is to have a fixed total supply of tokens, like 2.1 billion.
- Right now, there are 1.4 billion tokens, so 700 million are left for rewards.
- Use 10% of the remaining tokens each year as rewards.
- First year: 70 million tokens given as rewards.
- Next year: 63 million tokens given, and so on.
- This way, rewards get smaller each year, but tokens never run out.
- This could make Polkadot more attractive to people.

WHO: Proposal author

WHAT: Proposing a fixed supply and using a certain percentage of leftover tokens as inflation for staking rewards in Polkadot

PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified

Reducing inflation - VOTE NAY

- **Current Spending Periods**: Currently set at 24 days, these periods cause delays in funding.
- **Referendum Process**: It takes up to 28 days for a referendum to pass.
- **Confirmation Time**: An additional 7 days are needed for confirmation.
- **Cumulative Delay**: If confirmation ends on the first day of a new spending period, another 24 days are required, totaling up to 2 months.
- **Arbitrary Duration**: The 24-day period is considered arbitrary and problematic.
- **Proposal for Change**: Suggest reducing the spending period to the shortest possible time, ideally one day or one week if technically feasible.
- **Purpose of Change**: The shorter the period, the less uncertainty and quicker the funding process.

Proposal: **Reduce spending period to shortest possible time, ideally 1 day, or max 1 week, to avoid 2-month wait for funds.** Current 24-day period causes unnecessary uncertainty. Timeframe/resources not specified.

Reducing duration of spending periods

- The Polkadot EVM Collective is a group that works on everything related to EVM (Ethereum Virtual Machine) on Polkadot.
- It has four main goals: standardizing EVM changes, making development transparent, creating a roadmap, and providing expert advice.
- Members are ranked as Junior or Senior, and their roles define their responsibilities, like maintaining projects or editing documents.
- The collective uses a flat ranking system, meaning ranks only affect voting power, not other benefits.
- Members must stay active by participating in regular checks, or they lose voting rights and roles.
- The collective plans to have its own salary and treasury system, but funding will be decided by Polkadot referendums.
- Small collectives are preferred over one big group because they are faster, clearer, and easier to manage.

WHO: Polkadot EVM Collective
WHAT: On-chain technical collective for EVM standardization, development and maintenance, creating an inclusive roadmap, and providing expert opinions
PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Salary and sub-treasury system for future use with values set to 0, any increase or funding only done through Polkadot referendums. Inactivity check utilized to ensure active members, with ranks and roles defining voting power and responsibilities. Seeding members subject to final vote of a root referendum. Small collectives deemed more effective for carrying out tasks. Flat ranking system with two ranks and separate concept of roles to define responsibilities.

Approve the Polkadot EVM Collective

- Some important decisions in a system should not be delegated to others.
- Important tracks include: Root track, Wish for change track, and Treasurer track.
- Delegation means trusting someone else to make decisions for you.
- For very important decisions, it's risky to trust others because they might not make the same choice as you.
- Examples of important decisions include changing the system or spending money.
- Delegation is good for less important decisions but not for critical ones.
- This helps protect the system from mistakes or bad choices.

Proposal: Do not allow delegations on vital tracks (root, wish for change, treasurer) to protect system integrity. Delegation is good but risky for extreme importance. No specific target. No price/timeframe/resources mentioned.

Restrict delegations on root and treasurer tracks

root

whitelisted_caller

staking_admin

treasurer

lease_admin

fellowship_admin

general_admin

auction_admin

referendum_canceller

referendum_killer

small_tipper

big_tipper

small_spender

medium_spender

big_spender

Referenda Wish For Change

Origin able to dispatch a whitelisted call.

Origin able to cancel slashes and manage minimum commission.

Origin for spending up to 10,000,000 DOT from the treasury as well as generally administering it.

Origin for managing the composition of the fellowship.

Origin able to spend around 250 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 1,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 10,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 100,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend up to 1,000,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

[2] Origin: WishForChange