Origin for signaling that the network wishes for some change

wish_for_change

The Polkadot Community Foundation has proposed a plan to launch a "Polkadot" branded payment card for the Polkadot ecosystem. This non-custodial payment card will be issued globally and work anywhere Visa is accepted. It will be compatible with Apple Pay and Google Pay, and users will only pay a small transaction fee (under 1%). The card will be powered by smart contracts and allow users to hold and pay with USDC. The Polkadot Community Foundation has chosen Baanx as the card provider and issuer, and the card program will be managed by CL, a brand of Baanx. The card will be a debit card using the Visa network and will carry no other branding. There will be no cost to the Polkadot Treasury for the origination and setup of this card program. The card program aims to provide an alternative to traditional banking and increase the usability of the Polkadot ecosystem for payments and DeFi.

Executed

Polkadot Community Foundation: Polkadot Payment Card

- The proposal outlines how the Marketing Bounty (MB) can work with service providers (SPs) for marketing projects related to Polkadot.
- The Polkadot Community Foundation (PCF) will act as the legal partner for these contracts.
- The MB helps SPs who need a legal address or payments in regular money (fiat).
- A special account called a "legal fund" will be created to manage costs for contracts and payments to SPs.
- Standard contracts will be made to save time and money, but custom contracts can be created if needed.
- The PCF will set up an account to manage payments and will work with the MB on contract processes.
- All agreements must follow the law in the Cayman Islands and Polkadot's rules and goals.

Polkadot Community Foundation: Allow the Marketing Bounty to Execute Formal Contracts through the Polkadot Community Foundation

### Summary
This proposal aims to increase Polkadot's visibility by requiring teams funded by the Polkadot Treasury to display the Polkadot logo on their websites, products, and social media. 

- Teams must show the logo as long as their project is active.
- They should specify where and how they will display the logo in their funding proposals.
- Teams can choose from phrases like "Funded by Polkadot" or "Powered by Polkadot."
- The Polkadot Brand Hub provides design guidelines.
- This rule applies to future funding requests but encourages past recipients to follow it.
- Exceptions can be made for cases where displaying the logo is not possible.

The goal is to boost Polkadot's brand awareness and show its support for funded projects.

Wish For Change | Polkadot Branding Guideline

Polkadot OpenGov has set standards for bounties to ensure they meet minimum requirements before receiving funding. These standards cover objectives, funding, curators, recipients, and transparency.

1. **Bounty Objectives**: Bounties must have clear goals that the community can judge their success by. Funds can only be used for the objectives they were requested for.

2. **Funding**: Bounties can request funding once per quarter. Requests must include a budget breakdown, timeframe, and transparency reports on past activities. They must be discussed for at least 2 weeks before a vote.

3. **Curators**: Curators must have a verified identity and payment terms must be outlined. They cannot sign payments for their own work, except for compensation. They must declare conflicts of interest and report any issues.

4. **Recipients**: Recipients must have a verified identity and cannot claim compensation for work they've already been paid for.

5. **Transparency**: Bounties must provide materials like a public communication channel, an overview page with objectives and contact information, a spending policy, a table of child bounties, monthly progress summaries, and quarterly financial statements.

The document also discusses the importance of having clear objectives, the ability to change them, and the challenges of setting success metrics. It emphasizes the need for both summary and detailed transparency, and provides examples of how bounties can meet these standards with simplicity and efficiency.

This document lays out standards which shall apply to all bounties funded through Polkadot OpenGov. The basic intention is to ensure that minimum standards are upheld before a budget is granted. It defines how these executive bodies should handle budgeting, transparency, and compliance.

## 1\. Bounty Objectives

1.  Bounties shall have a clearly defined list of objectives by which their success can be judged by the community.
2.  Funds may only spent within the boundaries of the objectives for which the funds were requested.

## 2\. Funding

1.  Bounties may request funding at a maximum of one time per quarter.
2.  Funding requests must include
    1.  Budget breakdown: The budget has to give an honest picture of the intended spending and be broken down into positions. Positions should be explained in sufficient detail.
    2.  Timeframe: The timeframe should give clarity to OpenGov when it can expect the next funding request.
    3.  Transparency reports that cover past activities up to the time of the request.
3.  A funding request has to be put up for discussion in any of the established governance platforms or the Polkadot forum for at least 2 weeks before it is put to a vote.

## 3\. Curators

1.  All curators must have a verified on-chain identity.
2.  Payment terms of curators must be outlined in the funding request. If curators shall receive payment, including for prior work, it has to be defined in the payment terms.
3.  Curators may not sign payments for work that they have executed, except curator compensation.
4.  Curators must not claim compensation for work that they already have been compensated for otherwise.
5.  Curators have to publicly declare and document any conflicts of interest that come up during their duty.
6.  Curators have to publicly report any misbehavior or other issues that conflict with the effective and efficient operation of the bounty.

## 4\. Recipients

1.  All recipients must have a verified on-chain identity.
2.  Recipients must not claim compensation for work that they already have been compensated for otherwise.

## 5\. Transparency

Bounties are required to provide the following materials for transparency:

1.  Official public communication channel where curators are regularly available and the public can participate
2.  Regularly updated official overview page
    1.  Objectives
    2.  Main contact point
    3.  Link to the public communication channel
    4.  A list of all current curators
    5.  Links to all progress summaries and all other transparency materials listed below
    6.  Links to relevant documentation
    7.  Link to current child bounties h. Guidance for executors on how to participate in the bounty
3.  Spending Policy, including how curators are compensated
4.  A table of child bounties that contains: status, name, description, amount, beneficiary username, beneficiary address, links to evidence. The table is available in an open format (XLSX, CSV, or similar)
5.  Monthly progress summary posted to the bounty page, signed off by at least one curator
    1.  Current status of projects
    2.  Current bounty balance
    3.  Current plans d. Notable changes to objectives, curation team, operations, etc.
6.  Quarterly financial statement
    1.  Balance
    2.  Income and Expenses
    3.  Summary of curator payments
    4.  Summary of payments by recipient
    5.  available in an open format (XLSX, CSV or similar)

# Appendix

These are additional questions we have received and considerations we have discussed. They are not included in the on-chain proposal (to keep the proposal minimal) and are intended to help you interpret the intention of the proposal.

## Bounty Objectives

### Would a strategy be considered the defined objectives?

A strategy is much bigger. Objectives are the first part of a strategy. So yes, a proper strategy contains objectives. However, a list of objectives doesn't yet make a strategy.

### Shouldn't a bounty be able to change its objectives?

Yes. Bounties need to be able to adapt to changing circumstances. However, if a bounty promises to do work to achieve a certain goal it should not take the granted money and do something different with it. If it wants to change what the money is designated for, it should have to request a change.

Likewise, it is easy for a bounty to change the objectives for future funding, because it is submitting a funding request anyways. In the context of requesting new funding, it can also communicate changed objectives.

### Should there be success metrics?

In general it would be very helpful to measure against hard metrics. The problem is that it is really hard to arrive at reasonable metrics and very often people come up with bad metrics just so that they can provide KPIs. We have chosen to not include a requirement for metrics yet, because the ecosystem as a whole is not yet mature enough to have agreed on the right metrics. A good first step is to start finding the metrics that make sense before prescribing that metrics have to be used.

### Should a bounty end date be defined?

In the past, OpenGov has shown to just close bounties when they stopped performing. We don't think this has to be explicitely defined.

## Funding

### Will bounties be denied funding if they don't follow the rules outlined in this document?

It is still up to OpenGov, but the idea is that OpenGov shall question bounties that do not provide these things. We suggest OpenGov denies funding requests if proper scoping and transparency criteria are not fulfilled.

### Why should a funding request contain a budget breakdown with specific details? Aren't the details already provided with the objectives?

The objectives long-term and generic in nature. The quarterly budget is focused on specific projects. It might touch only some of the objectives or with different priorities. It is more specific. The idea is to communicate specific plans for how the money is used, not some general ambitions.

## Transparency

### Summary and Details

There are 2 parts to transparency: summary and details

-   **For the casual observer, getting a quick overview summary is important.** For them, the answer cannot be that they can "look it up in a table, drive folder, meeting notes, or on-chain". Casual observers are the majority of the participants. For the casual observer, short summaries are important. Auditors need summaries to save time.
-   **For the transparency nerd, detail is important.** For them (and auditors), being able to verify all the claims given in summaries is crucial. Bonus points if it is structured data to allow automation to take place.

When we talk about transparency, both aspects are needed: summary and details.

### But transparency creates extra work

Yes, dealing with other peoples money requires making it transparent what you did with the money.

### Simple and short is fine

You don't need a dedicated website. Updating the description on the bounty pages in governance explorers like Subsquare/Polkassembly is very much fine. It even helps casual observers find your information quickly.

The same is true for summaries, reports, etc. Keep them short and simple and save everyone time.

### Overview Page

The overview page can be a the Subsquare/Polkassembly page, a dedicated website, Notion page or similar. See examples below:

Events Bounty

-   Linktree: [https://linktr.ee/dotevents\_](https://linktr.ee/dotevents_)
-   Website: [https://dotevents.xyz/](https://dotevents.xyz/)

UX Bounty:

-   Notion Page: [https://braille-wtf.notion.site/UX-Bounty-Homepage-WIP-167a1782242e477bbb9f7a066ef447dd](https://braille-wtf.notion.site/UX-Bounty-Homepage-WIP-167a1782242e477bbb9f7a066ef447dd)

### Quarterly Financial Statements

Financial statements should provide detailed explanations and metrics of bounty operations. See examples below:

Events Bounty

-   [https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y8DuYnXpNuGJYALjJSUJ83ogJypWoOrL2df1\_6XTfYc/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.tv09ho3qoge](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y8DuYnXpNuGJYALjJSUJ83ogJypWoOrL2df1_6XTfYc/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.tv09ho3qoge)

PAL

-   [https://github.com/polkadot-assurance-legion/pal-docs/blob/main/community-reports/pal-24h1.md](https://github.com/polkadot-assurance-legion/pal-docs/blob/main/community-reports/pal-24h1.md)

### Monthly summaries

Summaries can be short bullet point summaries that gives the general idea of progress for public oversight, they dont have to be as detailed as quarterly reports.

Polkadot OpenGov sets standards for bounties. Bounties must have clear objectives, request funding quarterly, and provide transparency reports. Curators and recipients must have verified on-chain identities. Transparency materials include an overview page, spending policy, child bounties table, monthly progress summary, and quarterly financial statement. The proposal does not prescribe success metrics, end dates, or a dedicated website. Transparency requires both summary and detail, and summaries can be short bullet points.

Bounty Compliance Standards 1.0

### Acurast Proposal Summary

- **Proposal**: Acurast seeks approval for inclusion in Polkadot's marketing narratives.
- **Current Status**: Acurast Canary testnet is active on Kusama with 17,000+ phones and 84M+ transactions.
- **Future Plans**: Acurast plans to launch its mainnet on Polkadot soon.
- **Recent Proposals**: Acurast is following other recent proposals like Moonbeam, Hydration, Novasama, and Centrifuge.
- **Requirement**: Specific approval is needed for continued inclusion in marketing narratives via OpenGov.
- **Links**: More info at [Acurast Website](https://acurast.com) and [Acurast Docs](https://docs.acurast.com/).

WHO: Acurast
WHAT: Place an on-chain remark for inclusion in Polkadot Bounty #33 marketing narratives
PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified

Inclusion of Acurast in Marketing Narratives

Polkadot wants to make all addresses the same across their system. Right now, there are many different address formats, which can be confusing. They want to use one format, starting with the number '1', for all chains that connect to Polkadot. This will make it easier for people to recognize their accounts and know where their money is going. They will also use special address prefixes to help people see where their money is going when they copy an address. This change will make things simpler and safer for everyone using Polkadot.

## Summary

This proposal aims to simplify and unify the address format across the Polkadot ecosystem to improve user experience and reduce user confusion. Currently, over 150 registered entries use different SS58 address prefixes, creating fragmentation and complicating the user experience.

This proposal is a result of multiple discussions which were consolidated in the polkadot forum. This post provides more detailed explanation and reasoning behind the proposed changes:

[https://forum.polkadot.network/t/unifying-polkadot-ecosystem-address-format/10042](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/unifying-polkadot-ecosystem-address-format/10042)

🚧 This initiative falls under the UX Bounty scope and the necessary resources will be covered by its budget. You can find all relevant materials [here](https://www.notion.so/braille-wtf/UXB-1-UX-Issue-1-Unified-Address-Format-9e7c414ae769471c9016c9d8463a4d49).

## Proposed Changes

-   Adopt a unified SS58 address format for all compatible Polkadot parachains:
    
    -   Use Prefix:0 (addresses starting with '1') for all compatible chains that wish to connect to Polkadot ecosystem
    -   This allows users to easily recognize their accounts across different chains

Implement readable address prefixes roughly based on [EIP-3770](https://eips.ethereum.org/EIPS/eip-3770) to help prevent users from sending assets to the wrong chain

-   This allows users to easily see the intended destination chain when copying address

       ![readable-prefix](https://i.ibb.co/NYTBQKv/7eb16e0314f51c593e14306d7e2fec67b6142122.png)

## Benefits

-   Simplifies user experience across the ecosystem
-   Reduces confusion caused by multiple address formats
-   Minimizes the risk of users sending assets to incorrect chains
-   Streamlines development processes for builders in the ecosystem

## Implementation

As a part of the UX bounty, we will do the following to ease implementation of this proposal:

-   Create detailed guides for developers to ensure a seamless transition
-   Create specification for the prefix decoding
-   Develop explanatory documents and tools for users and developers to be able to provide support during the transition period (i.e. address conversion tool, prefix decoder)
-   Work with wallet providers, dApps, and exchanges to help them update their interfaces

## Notes

-   The wish for change serves as guidance; chains and dApps can choose their own prefixes, however this wish for change proposal aims to show, that the users of the Polkadot ecosystem wish to simplify the UX within the ecosystem and it is advisable to follow this change.

## Impact

This change will significantly enhance the user experience within the Polkadot ecosystem, making it more accessible and user-friendly for both new and existing users. It will also reduce the complexity for developers building on the platform.

[ Wish for change ] Unifying Polkadot Ecosystem Address Format

- The proposal suggests making the polkadot.com website's source code open source.
- This would promote transparency, security, and collaboration in the project.
- Developers could contribute improvements and find security issues.
- It would align with Polkadot's decentralized principles.
- The community can vote on this proposal to decide its future.
- Open-source code helps ensure the website is secure and well-maintained.
- This move is in line with the principles of blockchain technology.
- The decision will be made based on community feedback and votes.

WHO: Polkadot community
WHAT: Gauge opinion on making polkadot.com website source code open-source
PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified

[Wish For Change] Referendum #1157 - Make polkadot.com code, open source

### Wish for Change (WFC) Referendum

- **Purpose**: To gather token holders' opinions on updating Polkadot's economic parameters.
- **Key Changes**:
  - Fixed treasury inflow.
  - No adjustment of staking rewards based on staking rates.
  - Potential reduction in overall inflation.
- **Community Discussions**: Several forums and livestreams have discussed these changes.
- **Rules**:
  - Only executed WFCs can be candidates.
  - The WFC with more AYE votes (weighted) is preferred.
  - WFCs should ideally run in parallel.
- **Non-Binding**: The referendum doesn't force changes; it aggregates voter opinions.
- **Outcome**: A root referendum will implement the winning WFC's logic.
- **Current Proposal**: 8% total inflation with 15% to the Treasury, leading to gradually decreasing inflation.

Polkadot proposes a Wish for Change (WFC) referendum to gather token holders' sentiment on implementing a fixed treasury inflow, removing staking rewards adjustment, and potentially reducing inflation. The referendum is not binding but aims to aggregate voters' opinions. This proposal suggests setting an 8% total inflation on a fixed total issuance, with 15% diverted to the Treasury, leading to gradually decreasing inflation over time. The timeframe and resources are not specified.

Polkadot's Economics Parameters: Proposal 3 (8% total inflation in the first year, then gradually decreasing)

- This proposal suggests including Centrifuge in marketing narratives funded by Polkadot Bounty #33.
- Centrifuge is a platform that can be found at [centrifuge.io](https://centrifuge.io/).
- The proposal follows recent referendums:
  - Referendum 801 (Moonbeam)
  - Referendum 834 (DED)
  - Referendum 854 (Hydration)
  - Referendum 862 (Novasama Technology)
  - Referendum 1020 (Bifrost)
- These referendums show that continued inclusion in marketing requires approval through OpenGov.

WHO: The proposer
WHAT: To include Centrifuge in marketing narratives funded by Polkadot Bounty #33
PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified

Inclusion of Centrifuge in Marketing Narratives

### Summary of the Referendum

- The referendum proposes increasing the recommended core count for reference hardware from 4 to 8.
- This change would start in January 2025.
- The Polkadot binary is a multithreaded program that benefits from more hardware cores.
- Currently, the minimum hardware requirement is 4 cores with SMT disabled.
- With async backing enabled, parachains can produce larger blocks, increasing execution time.
- Validators need to check relay chain blocks and parachain blocks, which requires more CPU cores.
- Raising the core count to 8 is intended to prepare for future network growth.
- The Polkadot binary will continue to run with a warning if the hardware does not meet the new requirements.

Polkadot proposes to increase the recommended core count for reference hardware from 4 to 8 for validators starting January 2025, to prepare for future usage increase. No change in behavior for machines not meeting requirements.

Increase recommended core count for validators reference hardware from 4 to 8

Bifrost is a leading Liquid Staking Technology (LST) protocol on Polkadot and Kusama. They have proposed to include their products in Polkadot Bounty #33 - Marketing Bounty. Their products include:

1. Bifrost: The Liquid Staking Standard for Any Chain, secured by Polkadot.
2. SLP: Liquid Staking Protocol using Polkadot SDK and decentralized validators-collators through Bifrost OpenGov.
3. Omni LS: The omnichain Liquid Staking Hub, based on SLPx the extension Liquid Staking pallet using XCM calls.
4. Loop Stake: The leverage LST pallet for the Polkadot ecosystem.

Bifrost supports other PoS networks like Astar, Moonbeam/Moonriver, Manta, and aims to make Polkadot shine on Filecoin and Ethereum. They have partnered with many teams and dapps for cross-marketing initiatives. Their main dapps are Bifrost dapp and Omni LS.

Bifrost's products highlight Polkadot SDK, interoperability, and synergies between teams inside the Polkadot ecosystem. They help release locked liquidity, participate in governance, and secure the relay-chains. This proposal follows recent referendums that require specific approval through OpenGov for continued guaranteed inclusion in marketing narratives.

This proposal, if approved, will place the following on-chain remark with event:

`Inclusion of Bifrost's products in marketing narratives funded by Polkadot Bounty #33 - Marketing Bounty, namely: 1. Bifrost: The Liquid Staking Standard for Any Chain. Secured by Polkadot 2. SLP: Liquid Staking Protocol leveraging Polkadot SDK and decentralized validators-collators through Bifrost OpenGov. 3. Omni LS: The omnichain Liquid Staking Hub, based on SLPx the extension Liquid Staking pallet leveraging XCM calls. 4. Loop Stake: The leverage LST pallet for the Polkadot ecosystem.`

You can learn more about Bifrost here: [https://bifrost.io](https://bifrost.io)

Bifrost is the leading LST protocol on both Polkadot and Kusama with vDOT and vKSM. vDOT use cases:

-   vDOT retaining voting rights in OpenGov. Only LST having the feature.
-   vDOT as collateral for Interlay's iBTC vaults
-   vDOT as collateral for Pendulum's Spacewalk vaults
-   vDOT as collateral in Interlay's lending/borrowing market
-   Yield DCA on Hydration
-   LPing on Moonbeam (Stellaswap, Beamswap), Astar (Arthswap), Hydration (omnipool) and Bifrost
-   Leverage staking (Loop Stake) on Bifrost with no liquidation

We also support other PoS networks within the ecosystem: Astar, Moonbeam/Moonriver, Manta, and are trying to make Polkadot shine on Filecoin and Ethereum.

We have already partnered with many teams (pioneer with Airlyft for Substrate support), parachain teams (Zeitgeist, MangataX, Moonbeam, Astar, Interlay, Hydration…) and dapps (The Great Escape, Exiled Racers, DEXs…) for cross-marketing initiatives. Bifrost's main dapps are:

-   Bifrost dapp: [app.bifrost.io](https://app.bifrost.io)
-   Omni LS: [omni.ls](https://omni.ls)

Bifrost's products are designed to highlight Polkadot SDK, interoperability, synergies between teams inside the Polkadot ecosystem, releasing locked liquidity, participating in governance and… securing the relay-chains !

We are making this proposal after these recent proposals:

[Referendum 1010 (Energy Web)](1010)

[Referendum 801 (Moonbeam)](https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/801)

[Referendum 834 (DED)](Referendum%20834%20$DED$)

[Referendum 854 (Hydration)](https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/854)

[Referendum 862 (Novasama)](862)

These referendums indicate that continued guaranteed inclusion in marketing narratives require specific approval through OpenGov.

WHO: Bifrost
WHAT: Inclusion of Bifrost's products in marketing narratives funded by Polkadot Bounty #33 - Marketing Bounty
PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified

Inclusion of Bifrost Products & Solutions in Marketing Narratives

Plaza and Defi Bounty

Plaza name

I recommend that the marketing strategy should be around creating as much awareness as possible about Polkadot towards crypto end users so that this will signal to VCs and investors that there is an interest in Polkadot and they will start investing in projects building on Polkadot because they want to ride the Polkadot wave If you want to understand more about the strategy please listen to the following audio: https://x.com/giottodf/status/1809474068615241855

Direction of marketing strategy

Exclude Astar from marketing narratives

### Polkadot Tooling Collective (PoToC)

- **Purpose**: Recognize and support developers contributing to Polkadot's tools and libraries.
- **Mission**: Maintain tools for building dApps and general development on Polkadot.
- **Structure**: Initial ranks include Candidate and Member, with potential for more ranks in the future.
- **Funding**: Proposes a bounty-centered salary structure after proving effectiveness.
- **Initial Members**: A group of developers with contributions to Polkadot tooling.
- **Phases**: 
  1. Setup (6 months)
  2. Probation Period (6-12 months)
  3. Business As Usual (after probation)
- **Tools**: Includes both fundamental and extension tools for dApp development and general Polkadot tooling.

WHO: Polkadot token holders, Polkadot Tooling Collective (PoToC)

WHAT: Proposal for the inception of a new System Collective, PoToC, to recognize and retain developers who make significant contributions to tools and libraries that make Polkadot easier to maintain, use, and integrate.

PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: PoToC will request funds from the treasury to support a salary structure and sub-treasury after a formation period to establish members and display effectiveness. The salary structure will be bounty-centered, and the exact constants for the size of the bounties and baseline salary will be proposed through a secondary document in `Phase II`. The setup phase should take at most 6 months, the probation period from 6 months to 1 year, and the business as usual phase will start after the probation period.

Proposing The Polkadot Tooling Collective

- This proposal asks if we should add smart contracts to Polkadot's Asset Hub system by the end of 2024.
- It would use new technology called PolkaVM and a tool to make Ethereum contracts work on Polkadot.
- Adding smart contracts would make it easier and faster to work with assets on Polkadot.
- It would also let developers use Solidity, a popular programming language for smart contracts.
- This could make Polkadot more attractive to developers and businesses.
- However, it might make Asset Hub more complex and could compete with other Polkadot parachains.
- The community will need to help with tools, marketing, and education to make this successful.

Parity proposes adding a smart contract execution environment to Polkadot's Asset Hub parachain, allowing synchronous and permissionless interactions with assets. The proposed solution will be based on pallet-contracts, PolkaVM, and an EVM to PolkaVM recompiler for Solidity/EVM compatibility. The deployment is targeted by the end of 2024. Parity will provide the core technology, but the community is needed for tooling and integration, marketing, communication, education, and liquidity from Ethereum. The first milestone is planned to be rolled out at the end of this year.

Should we allow EVM compatible contracts on Asset Hub?

### Novasama Technologies Proposal

- **Purpose**: To include Novasama Technologies' products in Polkadot's marketing narratives.
- **Products**: 
  1. **Nova Wallet**: Best mobile wallet for Polkadot.
  2. **Telenova**: User-friendly self-custodial wallet on Telegram.
  3. **Nova Spektr**: Enterprise desktop wallet for Polkadot.
  4. **Polkadot Vault**: Native hardware wallet for Polkadot.
- **Funding**: Proposed under Polkadot Bounty #33 – Marketing Bounty.
- **Recent Proposals**: 
  - Referendum 801 (Moonbeam)
  - Referendum 834 (DED)
  - Referendum 854 (Hydration)
- **Requirement**: Specific approval through OpenGov for continued inclusion in marketing narratives.

Novasama Technologies proposes to include their products in Polkadot Bounty #33 marketing narratives for a guaranteed inclusion in the ecosystem. The proposal comes after recent referendums, and the products include Nova Wallet, Telenova, Nova Spektr, and Polkadot Vault. No price, timeframe, or resources are mentioned.

Inclusion of Novasama Technologies' Products in Marketing Narratives

### Proposal Summary

- **Title**: Inclusion of Hydration in marketing narratives funded by Polkadot Bounty #33 - Marketing Bounty
- **Purpose**: To include Hydration in marketing narratives funded by a Polkadot bounty.
- **Hydration**: A service or project related to Polkadot, details available at [hydration.net](https://hydration.net/).
- **Background**: This proposal follows two recent referendums:
  - [Referendum #801](https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/801)
  - [Referendum #834](https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/834)
- **Requirement**: Specific approval for continued use of these services through OpenGov.

WHO: The proposer
WHAT: Placing an on-chain remark about including Hydration in marketing narratives funded by Polkadot Bounty #33
PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified.

Inclusion of Hydration in marketing narratives

- A parachain (not named) asked for visibility from a marketing bounty.
- The best way to receive this visibility is through a community referendum.
- The referendum would decide if the parachain should be included in the marketing bounty.
- This method is considered the most democratic.
- Moonbeam, a significant parachain, is initiating this process.
- Other parachains should also submit their own referendum requests.
- The goal is to ensure fair and community-driven decisions.

WHO: Parachains interested in receiving visibility from marketing bounty.

WHAT: Submit a referendum on the track requesting inclusion.

PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified.

Inclusion of Moonbeam in marketing narratives

In 2023, Laurent Koehler, Co-Director of the Founder Institute in Hong Kong, planned to launch a Web3 vertical in 2024 to help investors and applicants. He worked with a Web3 Advisor to explore opportunities for the Polkadot ecosystem. On March 15, 2024, they signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to onboard mentors and develop co-marketing initiatives.

The Founder Institute is the world's largest pre-seed startup accelerator, founded in 2009. It helps early-stage startups succeed and has expanded globally, operating in over 200 cities. Alumni have raised over $1.75 billion in funding, and the portfolio value exceeds $30 billion. The Institute supports ongoing growth through post-program benefits like introductions to partners and investors.

The Founder Institute will launch its first Web3 cohort in its Core Program, starting on May 28, 2024, and ending on September 3, 2024. Polkadot will be a key program partner, providing support from its network of experts. The collaboration will help Polkadot gain exposure to new companies, projects, investors' networks, and raise awareness within the Founder Institute network.

Both the Founder Institute and Polkadot have responsibilities in this collaboration, such as providing mentors, presenting at program sessions, and creating special offers for enrolled founders. The MOU serves as a formal agreement between the parties, outlining their roles and responsibilities. Irina Karagyar, a Polkadot Head Ambassador, will sign the MOU on behalf of Polkadot, ensuring the agreement aligns with community decisions and the decentralized ethos of Polkadot.

In the summer of 2023, Mr. [Laurent Koehler,](https://www.linkedin.com/in/lkoehler81/) the Co-Director of the Founder Institute in Hong Kong, discussed his plans to launch a Web3 vertical in 2024 with me. His goal was to enhance business offerings for investors and applicants. As a growth Web3 Advisor at my company BQ9 and an active member of the Polkadot community, I found his vision particularly compelling. This prompted me to explore the unique opportunities it could present for the entire Polkadot ecosystem. Consequently, we began holding regular meetings where I contributed insights to help shape the program and evaluate the benefits of integrating with the Polkadot ecosystem. On March 15, 2024, Mr. Koehler and I formalized our collaboration, leading the Founder Institute to issue a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for Polkadot to onboard mentors and develop joint co-marketing initiatives.

\*\*Timing: \*\*We are living in crucial times for our industry towards mass adoption, and our initiatives are designed to help new startup founders learn about Polkadot's technology and its ecosystem, encouraging them to develop their projects within it. Given the nature of the Founder Institute, this collaboration is strategic and will enable the Polkadot ecosystem to gain essential exposure to new companies and projects, investors' networks, and to establish a presence and raise awareness within the Founder Institute network.

\*\*Relevance: \*\*The Founder Institute is recognized as the world's largest pre-seed startup accelerator. Founded in 2009 by Adeo Ressi and Jonathan Greechan, it was initially designed to provide early-stage startups with the structured process, feedback, and support network needed to succeed, which many entrepreneurs lacked at the time. This initiative started in Silicon Valley but quickly expanded globally due to high demand, now operating in over 200 cities and localized in nine languages​. To date, the Founder Institute's alumni have raised over $1.75 billion in funding, and the estimated portfolio value of these companies exceeds $30 billion. Beyond initial startup acceleration, the Founder Institute also supports ongoing growth through post-program benefits like introductions to potential partners and investors. They maintain a robust network of over 35,000 mentors and advisors to assist in various aspects of business development​.​ ([The Founder Institute](https://fi.co/))​.

**First-Mover Advantage:** The Founder Institute is set to launch its very first Web3 cohort within its Core Program, signifying a landmark expansion into the field of Web3. This inaugural cohort, which begins on May 28, 2024, and concludes on September 3, 2024, represents a significant milestone in the Institute’s history. It will be hosted by the Hong Kong Chapter. This new track will delve key verticals of the Web3 domain and will feature guidance from esteemed mentors within the Web3.0. Polkadot will be a key program partner in the Founder Institute's historic first Web3 cohort, bringing support from its network of distinguished experts from the Polkadot Ecosystem. To inaugurate this chapter with them gives the first-mover advantage to our ecosystem.

\*\*Founder Institute Responsibilities. \*\*Founder Institute shall undertake the following activities:

-   Provide online and onsite branding for Partner on the website for the FII Program
-   Introduce all enrolled founders in the Program to Partner Provide up to two (2) mentor slots for Partner as a mentor in the Program
-   Allow Partner to present at any desired session to all enrolled founders during the Program Email
-   Partner special offer to all enrolled founders in the Program (optional)

**Polkadot, Responsibilities**. Polkadot shall undertake the following activities:

-   Recommend a mentor(s) from the ecosystem
-   Present at the required program session(s) during the FII Program
-   Provide any marketing collateral necessary and required by FII to use as branding on the website(s) for the FII Program
-   Create a special offer for all enrolled founders in the Program (optional)

As previously mentioned, representatives from the Polkadot ecosystem will participate in the inaugural Web3 cohort from **May 28, 2024, to September 3, 2024**. However, our collaboration does not end there, since we will continue to recruit additional mentors for subsequent cohorts. Our goal is to understand the types of support founders seek from the Polkadot ecosystem and the innovative solutions they plan to introduce. We will use the insights gained from the first cohort to refine and enhance our engagement with the Founder Institute going forward.

**_Using this post on OpenGov as an MOU between Founder Institute & Polkadot._**

[MOU between Polkadot Ecosystem & Founder Institute](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1GI5UTYxZjD8JhqYcVhETZCPbd5sKNsaQ/view?usp=drive_link)

An MOU often serves as a formal agreement between parties, outlining their roles and responsibilities. However, since Polkadot is a decentralized software and needs to be supported by its community this MOU will be considered a liabilities exempt Pilot Project between the parties.. Consequently, Facilitators and Focal Points will perform to support the parties and will act free of liabilities as well. This method will ensure transparency and accessibility to all stakeholders within the community. [Irina Karagyar](https://www.linkedin.com/in/irina-karagyaur/), as a Polkadot Head Ambassador, as a representative, will sign the MOU posted on OpenGov only symbolically on behalf of Polkadot. This ensures that the agreement aligns with community decisions and the decentralized ethos of Polkadot. By following these steps, the MOU becomes a roadmap document, formalizing the agreement between Polkadot (represented by the Ambassador) and the Founder Institute.

![](https://example.com/your-image.png)![](https://i.ibb.co/55MzcFk/FI-Polkadot-X-post.png)

[https://fi.co/insight/the-founder-institute-launches-its-first-hong-kong-web3-accelerator-in-collaboration-with-polkadot](https://fi.co/insight/the-founder-institute-launches-its-first-hong-kong-web3-accelerator-in-collaboration-with-polkadot)

An overview of the Founder Institute: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBHc\_3NgUo4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBHc_3NgUo4)

MOU:

![](https://i.ibb.co/pRTxR7K/MOU-Polkadot-Signed-FI-BQ9-1-images-0.jpg)

![](https://i.ibb.co/Bz3x3Lc/MOU-Polkadot-Signed-FI-BQ9-1-images-1.jpg)

![](https://i.ibb.co/ckDWbHJ/MOU-Polkadot-Signed-FI-BQ9-1-images-2.jpg)

For any further questions and collaboration opportunities, please do not hesitate to contact Irina Karagyuar, Co-Founder & CEO BQ9, Ecosystem Growth Agency,  irina@bq9.io

WHO: Polkadot and the Founder Institute

WHAT: Polkadot will onboard mentors and develop joint co-marketing initiatives with the Founder Institute to enhance business offerings for investors and applicants. Polkadot will recommend a mentor(s) from the ecosystem, present at the required program session(s), and provide any marketing collateral necessary. The Founder Institute will provide online and onsite branding for Polkadot, introduce all enrolled founders to Polkadot, and allow Polkadot to present at any desired session.

PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: The collaboration will take place from May 28, 2024, to September 3, 2024, during the Founder Institute's first Web3 cohort. The collaboration is strategic and will enable the Polkadot ecosystem to gain essential exposure to new companies and projects, investors' networks, and to establish a presence and raise awareness within the Founder Institute network. The MOU will be considered a liabilities exempt Pilot Project between the parties.

Pilot MOU Proposal for a Collaboration between the Polkadot Ecosystem and the Founder Institute:

- 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.

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

**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

- **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

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