🗳️ This week, PolkaWorld voted on 10 @Polkadot OpenGov proposals, including 1 old proposal and 9 new proposals!
✅ #1542 GIGAHydration liquidity incentives (5 million DOT)
Vote change: NAY ➡️ AYE
After in-depth communication with the Hydration team and additional research, PolkaWorld now supports this proposal! Main points:
- Funds (5 million DOT) remain in the treasury and are gradually released through proxy accounts.
- Provided detailed funding allocation plans and integration goals with major platforms like Kraken, Coinbase, CoinMarketCap, CoinGecko, DefiLlama, etc.
- Helps to enhance Polkadot's TVL and ecosystem liquidity.
🚫 #1562 DotMemo v2 – On-chain event memory (70,000 USD)
Voting result: NAY
- Limited effectiveness in the first phase, unclear future ROI.
- Delivery content, KPI, and cost descriptions are unclear.
- Insufficient connection to the broader ecosystem.
✅ #1564 Bounty Hub (98,900 USD)
Voting result: AYE
- Fills a gap in the ecosystem for bounty tracking tools.
- Budget is reasonable, but it is suggested to clarify the milestone timeline.
🚫 #1567 PANews Polkadot branding (70,000 USD)
Voting result: NAY
- Initial quote was high ($180,000) then discounted to $70,000, which may raise trust issues.
- Lacking detailed explanation of media impact and ROI.
🚫 #1570 NFT Mozaic Grants (110,000 DOT)
Voting result: NAY
- The market for NFTs is cooling down, and the current NFT user base is weak.
- Over-reliance on KPI incentives.
- Ambiguity in delivery and budget allocation.
✅ #1572 Mimir multi-signature and ecosystem integration (157,000 USD)
Voting result: AYE
- Has been adopted and praised by multiple ecosystem projects.
- Budget is transparent, milestones are clear.
🚫 #1573 Polkadot App funding application (1,030,000 USD)
Voting result: NAY
- Lacking detailed budget and personnel descriptions.
- Timeline is unclear.
- Insufficient cost transparency.
🚫 #1574 W3PI Token Index (202,000 USD)
Voting result: NAY
- Team background and budget details are unclear.
- Benefits to the Polkadot ecosystem are not specified.
🚫 #1575 Inter Miami CF fan engagement (300,000 USD)
Voting result: NAY
- Cooperation details with IMCF are not clearly stated.
- Educational content, points system, and football fan interests may not match.
- Budget lacks detailed breakdown.
🚫 #1576 N3MUS gaming platform (25,000 DOT)
Voting result: NAY
- Dependent on the yet-to-launch AssetHub deployment.
- Uncertainty in delivery time.
------------------
💡 Thoughts in OpenGov this week
So far, our DV review work is nearing halfway. In most proposals we opposed, there is a common issue: lack of clarity - vague past reports, unclear delivery instructions, and ambiguous budget breakdown.
Theoretically, such vague proposals should not take up too much review time. However, in reality, we often spend more time searching for answers out of concern for missing key information. Frankly, this is an inefficient way of governance.
On the contrary, those proposals that are clearly expressed and detailed allow us to make judgments and decisions immediately.
Therefore, we sincerely urge everyone to express clearly in the proposals:
- Clear goals
- Clear execution details
- Clear report explanations (preferably with attachments for proof)
- Clear budget breakdown (specific usage for each part of the budget, rather than just stating $100,000 for marketing work without explaining what exactly is being done, how many people are involved, and for how long, etc.)