ChaosDAO would like to provide the following feedback from our community. We offer this feedback voluntarily in the spirit of OpenGov, in order to help teams improve their proposals so we can all build the network together.

1. Some members questioned the value and impact of some work that's being rewarded.

2. Some members raised concerns on the hourly rate used for this proposal relative to the output and impact of what's delivered.

ChaosDAO votes as a collective based on the results of our anonymous internal voting procedures. Our members are not required to provide any feedback about why they have voted in a particular direction. Similarly, to respect our members' right to anonymity, we will not be sharing the names of individuals who have chosen to voluntarily provide feedback. You can find out more about how we vote and how to get in contact with us here: https://x.com/ChaosDAO/status/1762986093316587995

@yooo 

Thanks for the message and feedback, Vonyi.

Thank you for saying the work deserves the $45K, as well as your comment on your notion site that the report I produced (https://multisigwtf.notion.site/Builder-Experience-Why-Teams-Join-or-Leave-Polkadot-15b702eca47180399df5f917fc14bc35) was "Honestly the best write up I've seen on this topic."

As to your vote and reasoning, there's a few questions I'd like to ask:

— You wrote that you're looking for comment from two parachain teams to confirm a detail in the report. However, you waited three weeks until the ref is halfway through the confirmation period in order to point this out. If this were such a strong factor in your determination (between abstain and aye), how come you didn't comment earlier and just ask for it? I've been dialoguing with other DVs during this time, but Polkadot Hungary has no channel for proposers to reach out and ask/answer questions, and has not reached out to me in any way to clarify things or ask a simple question. I can chase this down if needed, but at this point in time I will let the confirmation continue to run. In fact it shouldn't even matter as you acknowledge the work shows its worth.

— Why are you applying a different standard to this proposal from two other proposals you AYE'd before with no questions or requests for similar criteria?

According to your notion page linked above:

For Ref 1330, asking for basically the same amount (43K vs 45K) for the basically the same time period, you wrote:

"Same as referendum #1215 as in if you are promised money for your work then you should get it. There is nothing more hindering Web3 than the uncertainty of not getting paid. DonDiego and Lucy did proven, fantastic work to reignite the ambassador program and the pay is well deserved."

For Ref 1215

"On principle we should pay people when promised. Quality of work was not specified in the proposal and was not assessed. This is the least HAs should be paid for their time and commitment if they can demonstrate work done"

As a reminder, Ref 487 states:

“Head Ambassadors shall receive a salary of 10,000 USDT (or equivalent stablecoin) per month. This represents their commitment to representing Polkadot in the equivalent of full-time capacity and their ability to bring high-value entrants into Polkadot.”

Can you explain the disparity in evaluating my funding request?

Polkadot Hungary DAO voted Abstain on the proposal.

Your dedication and work is greatly appreciated, William! On behalf of the community, thank you for the tremendous amount of energy and time you invest for the success of the Polkadot ecosystem.

Although we think your work deserves the 45K USDT set out in the proposal, we voted Abstain because the proposal was not backed by open comment from the two Parachain teams you hold advisory positions in, Kylix Finance and G6 Network.

The Polkadot Hungary DAO can change its on-chain vote once per its bylaws, so if you receive comment to your proposal as backing from these Parachain teams that you have not received a payment from them in the last months, the DAO can change its on-chain vote.

You can view how the Polkadot Hungary DAO evaluated ref. 1352 on our public page [here].

Kus DAO have voted AYE (third voting).

✅ Recognized solo efforts like the Polkadot Handbook, BD support, and governance initiatives. Matches retroactive funding precedents.

❌ Concerns over retroactive funding practices, impact vs. value, and clarity on Giotto-linked HA program.

💪 Get involved: 🔗 Discord Invite or Telegram Invite

💬 Join the discussion: 🔗 Discussion Thread

~@Pieky

@1haHsRuCUCkbkPRmSrnfP8ps6cTaR2b5JCU5uNPUbxsVPbf 

I wanted to let you know that your characterization is incorrect, and hopefully you can reconsider:

The request is clearly not for a $208K salary. In fact the whole proposal spans 6 months of more than full time engagement, and the amount is $45K. 

It pretty much matches what was laid out in the root ref (487): 

“Head Ambassadors shall receive a salary of 10,000 USDT (or equivalent stablecoin) per month. This represents their commitment to representing Polkadot in the equivalent of full-time capacity and their ability to bring high-value entrants into Polkadot.”

I fulfilled this expectation, e.g. dedicated my time to Polkadot (no side businesses, no paid bounties, no startup, no paid consulting, etc.), under the expectation the details of the payment would be taken care of given the ref passed. It obviously wasn't taken care of for various reasons.

That being said, I believe work should be judged on it's value, rather than just some lowest common denominator pre-conceived notion of "what an ambassador is" from other ecosystems. 

HI. Ingo from KILT/PoKe here.

I would like to strongly support this Proposal. William gathered a round of BD people at Decoded 24 and managed a circle where we could share our views, update others and most importanlty could network and join forces. William's activities were a great help for PoKe and I really want him to continue his great work for the ecosystem.

William has been a fantastic ecosystem agent for a long time, and, as he states, not received any compensation for it. This in itself already stands in stark contrast to many other people who receive funding from multiple sources. His contributions have always been thoughtful, and made a positive impact. Yes, he could come up with a company name and then apply for DF or to a Bounty, but I appreciate the direct approach of asking the treasury for a contribution as an individual ecosystem agent. AYE!

Dear @W1ZSPR3,

Thank you for your proposal. Our vote on this proposal is AYE.

The Small Spender track requires a >50% majority of the voters according to our voting policy. This proposal has received six aye and zero nay votes from ten members, with one member abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

> The referendum received unanimous support, with members praising William's dedication, credentials, and valuable contributions to the ecosystem. Members expressed strong approval for retroactive funding tied to clear deliverables and highlighted the importance of supporting William’s initiatives. Some suggested incorporating similar proposals into structured programs like the ambassador program in the future.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO

DISCLAIMER: This proposal was submitted by our member @W1ZSPR3, who abstained from voting on this referendum.

@Xcavateofficial 

Thank you! It's been great so far working together and breathing life into an area that hasn't had enough attention in Polkadot (e.g. BD)

@REEEEEEEEEEDAO 

Thank you REEEEEEEEEE,

Appreciation is really appreciated :)

@LuckyFridayGovProxy 

Thanks for the detailed feedback - it really helps.

There’s a few places where I think there is a misunderstanding, so I will try to point them out and see if it changes your opinion.

“such a high cost. $100 / hr equates to a salary of ~ $200K per year”

• I believe some of the team from LF are from the US, so I hope you can understand that this is reasonable for a professional rate, especially an independent contractor that deals with taxes and expense. This is actually discounted from my normal rate.
• The $100/hr cost is not “out of the blue” - but it actually has been benchmarked against other "internal service providers" to the treasury. Specifically, the UX bounty curators (Ref 819) and marketing bounty 2.0 curators (Ref 1166) bill this rate for any and all work they do, and Lucky Friday voted AYE on both these proposals. The precedent has already been set on prior proposals that LF voted for. Not to mention many other teams charge this rate, including SubWallet, Nova, Talisman, etc. across all their employees. That being said, everyone of course should weigh up each proposal to independently determine if the value has been delivered.
• It should be noted that by definition, my proposal does not correspond to 200K per year, because I specifically do not account for all the time I spent. I only counted 1/2 the time where I felt I did higher quality work that met the bar. The total amount for this proposal is $45K and it corresponds to 6 months. Referencing the $200K number feels like a meme to increase the “shock value” but misrepresents the proposal.

“outrageous for an independent actor who did these things freely without any sort of contract or assumption there would be monetary reward.”

• I understand the outrage here, but I believe there are mitigating circumstances that I didn’t mention in the proposal. Actually I wasn’t an independent actor who did things freely without expectation: I was elected as a Head Ambassador with the expectation from Root Ref 487 that I dedicate full time to Polkadot, which is something that I fulfilled (no side businesses, no paid bounties, no startup, no paid consulting, etc.). That’s actually why I started doing this full time - because I believed it was required of my position according to my election.

In no uncertain terms, 487 states:

“Head Ambassadors shall receive a salary of 10,000 USDT (or equivalent stablecoin) per month. This represents their commitment to representing Polkadot in the equivalent of full-time capacity and their ability to bring high-value entrants into Polkadot.”

Thank you for recognizing “heroic efforts.” Whatever way this ref goes, I appreciate that, and not everything is about money so it means a lot. Other than that, I do hope you can reconsider your stance given the information I have provided here. Let me know if anything else should be clarified.

While this may not be the best voting result preferable by you, we would like to extend our gratitude for your contribution and commitment to the community. Based on our DAO off-chain voting, we have a split decision, down in the middle. As a result, an abstain vote has been cast. A general note from our members are that half of our members believe that you and your team have been building and acting in good faith for the ecosystem, while the other half of our members remain skeptical if the request can be justified by the work. Despite the voices within REEEEEEEEEE DAO, we hope that this does not discourage you from continuing your hard work. Lastly, some members also mentioned that, perhaps, the retroactive funding can also be discussed with the organizers aside from requesting Treasury.

I have worked with William in the Polkadot BD initiative and he has certainly been a long time leading driving force in the group, ensuring the right people are involved, focused and comitted to the developement right across polkadot ecosystem.

Lucky Friday would like to provide the following feedback from our team members. We have been specifically solicited to provide feedback on this particular referendum, collectively offering it and hope that it will help the proposer(s) of this referendum moving forward. As noted previously, Lucky Friday has voted NAY.

On the positive side, we applaud your staunch advoacy of the Polkadot ecosystem. You have been a long time member and supporter, Will, and our team appreciates the efforts you have gone through to represent our network in a positive light.

On the negative side, however, we do question the value of some of these outputs, especially at such a high cost. $100 / hr equates to a salary of ~ $200K per year, which most of our team members thought was outrageous for an independent actor who did these things freely without any sort of contract or assumption there would be monetary reward. Additionally, several team members were concerned about the precedent this would establish only to have others ask for huge sums of money for their individual / independent activities that are difficult to measure in terms of ROI.

On balance, we believe these heroic efforts should absolutely be rewarded. But as one team member said, "ask for a tip, not a salary." We would gladly support a Big Tipper proposal for the maximum amount of 1000 DOT. Granted, this would be nowhere near the amount being asked for at this time, but the potential upside of the token's future value may more than compensate for the difference.

Lucky Friday votes as a collective based on the results of our internal voting procedures and enacted on chain via the OpenGov server bot. No single team member is required to provide any feedback about why he or she has voted in a particular direction, although it is highly encouraged and happens often. With respect to our team members' right to anonymity and the private format in which we conduct our votes, we will not be sharing the names of individuals who have chosen to provide said feedback.

We encourage all members of the Polkadot community to join our OpenGov Public Forum on Telegram, and we respectfully ask that all proponents of referenda interact with us here for the sake of transparency: https://t.me/+559tyPSfmGg0NzUx

Kus DAO Votes ABSTAINED.

✅ Built a Polkadot Handbook for users/teams.

✅ Supported BD, events, governance, and onboarding.

❌ Concerns over retroactive funding precedent.

❌ $45K USDT request—impact vs. value unclear.  

💪 Get involved: 🔗 Discord Invite

💬 Join the discussion: 🔗 Discussion Thread 


~@Pieky

Great job on all the hard work, William! I believe this kind of dedication and hard work should be rewarded. William and I are both in the BD working group, and I can confirm he has been working hard on the initiatives he mentioned in his proposal. 

My experience with William is that he is always thoughtful and deeply inquiring about the issues we have in Polkadot and works to find solutions that work holistically.

I have met him several times, and he was always focused on pushing Polkadot forward. AYE from my side

@1haHsRuCUCkbkPRmSrnfP8ps6cTaR2b5JCU5uNPUbxsVPbf 

Hi Flez,

These activities are not "average ambassador" activities, and in fact this proposal specifically excludes activities related to the ambassdor program from the summer.

I believe if you look at the actual content/accomplishments laid out here, you will be able to see that, and you can benchmark against both within the Polkadot ecosystem as well as the outside business world, and I believe it's well within a reasonable range. You're of course open to your own opinion as to the impact of the activities. 

— William

This is an easy Aye for me! William is one of the agents I’ve seen actively participating in events, helping new members, and creating resources like the Polkadot Handbook (which is very useful), among many other activities.

Perhaps in the future, a mechanism should be established or some activities carried out by Polkadot agents should be standardized, so that any activity that isn’t rewarded through other means but benefits Polkadot could have an estimated reward.

Good luck with your proposal, William!

$100/hr tho?

you're asking for the equivalent of ~208,000/year salary when "the average Ambassador salary (globally) is $41,392 per year."

source: https://cryptojobslist.com/salaries/ambassador-salary

I implore everyone to read the report thoroughly. This is some of the most valuable ambassadorial work I've seen so far, with a clear focus on actions leading to real-world impact. A few standout points for me:

• Represented Polkadot and created reference materials to guide curious newcomers.
• Actively engaged on-the-ground with both current and potential builders. One of the few people I know doing this.
• Not just focused on new leads, but also on understanding why teams left and how to retain them.
• Initiated conversations that resulted in a CEX integration.
• Always present, helping anyone and everyone for the betterment of Polkadot.
• Consistently maintains composure and remains "politically correct", as an ambassador should.

We need less drama, and more of this!

Let me know if you have any questions!