Many thanks for your proposal!

We have carefully reviewed your application and are pleased to share our assessment below, prepared using our standardized evaluation methodology.

SUMMARY OF OUR ANALYSIS

■ Impact on the Ecosystem Integritee’s privacy sidechain significantly enhances Polkadot’s long-term relevance by addressing the critical need for confidential transactions, fostering user adoption and developer engagement. The scalable infrastructure promotes interoperability and user retention while mitigating the ecosystem’s lack of native privacy features. The repayment model ensures sustainable financial contributions to the treasury, supporting future growth.

■ Governance Compatibility The proposal aligns well with the MediumSpender origin, fitting the Treasury’s scope for funding impactful ecosystem projects. Prior approved proposals (#997, #617) establish a precedent, reinforcing its governance fit. It meaningfully engages Polkadot’s OpenGov system without overburdening it, adhering to established protocols.

■ Cost-Benefit Ratio The requested 201,140 USDT is proportionate to the sidechain’s demonstrated and potential benefits, including enhanced privacy and user retention. The repayment plan adds financial value to the Treasury, though the lack of documented cheaper alternatives slightly weakens cost optimization. The budget is reasonable compared to similar past proposals.

■ Transparency and Traceability While the proposal specifies the budget and timeline, it lacks detailed work packages, KPIs, and success criteria, limiting traceability. No explicit plans for ongoing documentation or reporting are outlined, hindering effective monitoring. The operational sidechain provides some evidence of outcomes, but transparency is only partially achieved.

■ Record and Credibility Integritee has a strong track record, having delivered the Incognitee sidechain, parachains, SubstraTEE, and Teeracle, with prior treasury funding success. Public documentation and presentations support their credibility, though code repositories are not explicitly cited. The team’s expertise and retroactive funding nature ensure capability to deliver.

CONCLUSION

🔹🔷🔹 vonFlandern 🔹🔷🔹 has therefore voted with: AYE

Our methodology aims to analyze and evaluate OpenGov proposals objectively, effectively, and transparently, establishing clear decision-making foundations for our votes while making our process visible to the community. For a deeper dive into our evaluation, please see the detailed report here.

Dear Proposer,

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

The Medium Spender track requires 50% quorum and simple majority of non-abstain voters according to our voting policy. This proposal has received five aye and two nay votes from ten members, with two members abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

> The voters expressed a range of opinions on the referendum, with some supporting the initiative as a necessary public good aimed at enhancing privacy within the Polkadot ecosystem. Many acknowledged the project's potential but raised concerns about the lack of clarity regarding funding, repayment mechanisms, and future proposals. While some voters emphasized the need for community adoption and marketing efforts, others called for more detailed financial transparency before proceeding. Overall, there was a consensus on the importance of the project, albeit with significant reservations.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Please feel free to contact us through the links below for further discussion.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO
Decentralized Voices Cohort IV Delegate

📅 Book Office Hours
💬 Public Telegram
🌐️ Web
🐦 Twitter
🗳️ Delegate

Our CTO brenzi appeared in AAG 222 to explain this proposal

https://x.com/TheKusamarian/status/1911162410649731529

@14rDffWRLEohEeZ7z2c9byrSeKQosgmmqpjGKmdUbNhcPHJA thanks for your comment

1. Privacy doesn't only come from L1 k-anonymity as we explain in our blog on anonymity.
2. Anonymity is very dependable already for actions on L2. Therefore, we disagree with your statement
3. Incognitee is the only available option for privacy on Polkadot for the time being and there's nothing else on the horizon. Demand for enhanced privacy will undoubtedly rise once Polkadot will be used in everyday actions like point-of-sale payments (e.g. Polkadot Pay) where Incognitee is unbeatable with its ~1s confirmation time. Or, vice-versa, Polkadot will never see adoption in everyday actions unless there's reasonable privacy.

Nye. In your Full Proposal Document link, I found the Usage Analysis. The usage number does not look good. It is way too small to provide any valid privacy. https://assethub-polkadot.subscan.io/transfer?address=14UsSvuFHWMTNhjkHcRt9gw1TogeWzg6zydVsHqK9EXhWHy9&token_category=native&token_category=asset&token_category=foreign_asset&page=1&page_size=25 Just not something I expect for at least year.

I feel it as a very bad sign and doubt the neccessarity of continuing support from treasury.

Hope my comment can warn the team and leads to your prosperity. PS: No offence, I know integritee is a good porject working on TEE topic.