Principles in Action: Helikon Polkadot Governance Archive

Number	450
Title	Project Glove: Introducing Capital Efficiency and Pseudo-Anonymity on top of OpenGov
Proponent	Address Labs
Amount	81’836 DOT
Vote	🔴 Nay @ 6.01M DOT
Comments	Hi, Thanks for the proposal. My vote remains nay, and here are my thoughts: “Capital inefficiency” in voting is by design. I think we can also call it “the price the voter has to pay” to influence the network in their desired direction. For instance, in your first example, the nay voter initially votes with 100 DOT @ 4x, and if the outcome is nay then they end up locking 2 DOT @ 2x. I don’t find it fair. Although an interesting idea and it could be a worthy experiment, I don’t think it should be supported by the treasury at this point at a 700K USD price tag. I don’t think low governance participation is solely due to capital inefficiency and possibility of being doxxed. These are just two of a myriad of reasons. I can see from your comments that the team has delivered a grant and been active in the field, but as far as I can see you have not delivered a Kusama or Polkadot treasury grant yet. Plus, the two of the GitHub accounts you shared (noah-foltz and hoco-gov) are almost completely blank, and the third one (roger-that-dev), although more active, does not seem to have any Substrate-related activity. These combined do not present enough credibility to me for an ask of 700K USD. I find the privacy voting an interesting topic, yet I think that it should only be a small scale experiment with a PoC, again, with a much less budget than 700K USD. To close, I think an initial PoC work awarded a 50-to-100K USD grant by the Kusama treasury could be a reasonable start for this project. link

Number	470
Title	Games Bounty [38]
Proponent	giottodf
Amount	100’000 DOT
Vote	🔴 Nay @ 6.01M DOT
Comments	Hi, I believe that for an ask of this size, a clear and quantified value proposition and flexible planning supported by a strong feedback cycle are pretty much required. This way, a small number of well-reputed curators can guide their judgement. So it seems like I’m pretty much in the opposite camp to the “non-method” offered by this proposal. Good luck! link

Number	471
Title	BD Bounty [39]
Proponent	giottodf
Amount	100’000 DOT
Vote	🔴 Nay @ 6.01M DOT
Comments	Hi, It strikes me to see that there is no planning or structure to a bounty proposal that’s asking for ~800K USD with today’s rate. There’s no detailed description, no solid value proposition, no business plan, no roadmap, just some rough notes on the bounty page. Noone can deny the importance of business development, and yes, talent outside the borders of the ecosystem should be somehow attracted, good ideas, but I would certainly expect a proposal of this sort to have some serious structure. It’s really not possible to take this proposal seriously the way it is now, so it’s an easy nay for me. Plans and documents may not always work, but there are reasons why people use them, one of them is accountability. Otherwise you’re asking for an enormous amount of trust, which is directly against why I’m personally here. Good luck. kukabi | Helikon link

Number	492
Title	Proposal: 2024 Polkadot Decoded China (Hong Kong) July 27-28 (Time TBD, usually two weeks after the Flagship Decoded)
Proponent	Aitijia’er
Amount	54’121 DOT
Vote	🔴 Nay @ 6.01M DOT
Comments	Hello Aitijia’er, Thanks a lot for the proposal. As I stated in our Element exchange and Zoom call, the community seems to be in favor of Hong Kong or Singapore over China, and so far you seem to be fine with moving the location to Hong Kong. So, that’s one update that should already go into the proposal in my opinion. Yet, even with the location change I’m rejecting this proposal in favor of an Asian bounty that would cover this conference, the contents of proposals 525 and 539, and possibly more activity in the area. Asian bounty should board trusted curators from both the Asian and Western communities. I believe that such a mixed curator board would help better connect these two communities, and offer a better system for checks and balances. Best of luck, kukabi | Helikon link

Number	493
Title	LiteSend - remittance service secured by Polkadot
Proponent	Electrocoin
Amount	28’761 DOT
Vote	🟢 Aye @ 6.01M DOT
Comments	Hello Electrocoin, Thanks for the proposal. I like the idea and the way in which AssetHub gets utilized in the remittance process. Whereas, for the process to work, both sender and recipient partner companies need to be in the countries that allow international crypto payments among legal entities. For example, Turkey, which is on your list of target countries, has imposed a ban on crypto payments. So it appears to me that this project is going to encounter more legal challenges than technical ones. Yet it’s still a valuable opportunity to test AssetHub in a real-world application. I vote in favor. Good luck, kukabi | Helikon link

Number	494
Title	Implementing a Polkadot-native system parachain for data storage: Phase 1/3
Proponent	Eiger
Amount	65’178 DOT
Vote	⚪ Abstain
Comments	Hello @Eiger, Thanks for the proposal. Milestones (3.2) section of your proposal documents M1 Research budget as 11 FTE, totaling $275K, yet the Overview section (3.1) states it as 18.25 FTE, ~$456K. What constitutes the 7.25 FTE difference? Best regards, kutsal | Helikon link @Eiger for another question on the budgeting, a quick search on the web shows the senior developer salary in Finland in the range of €6-12K monthly. Could you please explain the $25K monthly cost on your proposal for an engineer? I understand the technical leads could cost more than senior devs, but the pricing on the proposal seems to be uniform at $25K pcm for each engineer. link

Number	495
Title	The Sónar+D DAO by Polkadot
Proponent	GUZZU
Amount	41’242.84 DOT
Vote	🔴 Nay @ 6.01M DOT
Comments	Hello @GUZZU, I’m a fan of electronic music and have attended Sónar Istanbul in the past. Sónar is one of the most important electronic music festivals, and it would be very exciting to see development related to Sónar on Polkadot. Music business is notoriously inefficient, I know it first-hand as a once-full-time producer and musician, and web3 could play a crucial role in improving the industry. So, I find your proposal very exciting and relevant. Yet, I think you should restructure your proposal in milestones instead of asking for a lump sum for 3 years of activity. Your first proposal’s outcome and the outlook of this one show that you need to build up trust. Start with smaller milestones, and work with both Sónar and Polkadot communities to develop and demonstrate smaller sections of your idea. This way, you can prove to the community that you’re able to deliver on smaller budgets, and build trust up from there. I’m voting against this proposal, but looking forward to a more efficient proposal that works in much smaller initial milestones. Most of us build for free when we start out, just out of necessity or curiosity or for the love of it. Community is going to support you if you earn trust first. Best regards, kukabi | Helikon link

Number	497
Title	Bounty Proposal: Business Development Polkadot in Spain & Andorra - VOTE NAY
Proponent	Albert - I Love Cripto
Amount	-
Vote	🔴 Nay @ 6.01M DOT

Number	499
Title	Swissborg Proposal - A One Month Polkadot Awareness Campaign
Proponent	TheSussexTrader
Amount	30’000 DOT
Vote	🔴 Nay @ 6.01M DOT
Comments	Hello @TheSussexTrader, I would rather see DOT holders incentivized to stake natively on the network than hold it on your app, this way maybe they would make more than what you would offer as part of your proposed program. I’m not really sure your proposal offers a benefit to the network. Plus, you’re probably going to stake the user funds, or utilize them some other way, which would generate profits anyway, so why are you asking for treasury funds on top? Also I don’t really understand why the Polkadot treasury should pay a centralized exchange for such a promotion. This proposal is against what I stand for at a number of levels. I’m voting against. Best regards, kukabi | Helikon link