Proposed by:
Requested amount:
2.18K DOT≈$14,624.91

#1 · OpenCommunity Governance

Dear Polkadot community, With the launch of OpenGov on Polkadot around the corner, we plan to use the knowledge and skills we have gained from Kusama OpenGov to help kick-start Polkadot's OpenGov. Our main goal hasn't changed: we want to make the governance proposals process within the Polkadot community better, more open, and more successful. This proposal outlines our plan to bring our successful proposal auditing process, first started on the Kusama Network, to the Polkadot Network. It builds on the work of the OpenCommunity Governance project, which has been running on the Kusama network for the past five months. In this period we delivered 80+ Audit reports on Kusama OpenGov treasury proposals.

Problem

With the launch of OpenGon on Kusama, it became apparent that proposals are not very well structured, lack information, and include budgets that seem very hard to defend. Proposals can also be very diverse with a focus on different areas that not everyone can be familiar with. For all these reasons it is significantly time-consuming for voters to truly understand the proposal and cast an educated vote on it.

A significant challenge in the current proposal evaluation process is the lack of constructive feedback during the discussion phase. To address this, appointed auditors will focus on being more involved in the earlier phases of proposal development. This proactive approach will help proposers receive feedback and address potential weaknesses in their proposals before they are submitted onchain, giving them time to evaluate the feedback and make improvements.

Milestone 0: Prepare OpenCommunity Governance documentation

Milestone 0 focuses on adjusting the governance documents currently used in the Kusama network to align with the needs of the Polkadot ecosystem. This involves adjusting the Proposal and Audit templates, updating necessary documents on treasury sites, wiki, and GitHub, and initiating the audit process to improve the quality and transparency of incoming proposals with the set standards and guidelines.

Milestone 1: Implement OpenCommunity Governance

In Milestone 1, the primary objective is to start proposal audits while they are still in the discussion phase and follow up the proposals onchain.

A major challenge in the current proposal evaluation process is the lack of constructive feedback during the discussion phase. To address this, appointed auditors will shift their focus by becoming more involved in the earlier phases of proposal development. This proactive approach will help proposers receive feedback and address potential weaknesses in their proposals before they are submitted onchain, ultimately improving the overall quality of submissions.

Funding This proposal seeks funding of 2179.57 DOT split into 2 payments between auditors CoinStudio and Abdulbee. All details can be found in the Proposal document

All the documents, previous treasury proposals, deliverables and reports, audits are stored on our GitHub. We are also maintaining track records of auditor work and treasury proposals on the draft version of Airtable.

We are community oriented initiative and we are open to onboard additional auditors from the community, more details can be found in the following Kusama proposal.

Kusama ongoing project

Some examples of audit reports: Example 1, Example 2, Example 3

I am looking for feedback on this proposal so please feel free to ask questions and leave suggestions to help me further improve the presented project. Your suggestions will play a key role in enhancing the transparency and efficiency of our governance process. Discussion

Thank you!

Read more
StatusRejected
59%Nay
Aye (163)
2.23M DOT
Nay (97)
3.25M DOT
Decision28 / 28d
Confirmation12 / 12h
0.0%0.09%
0.0%Support Threshold
0Support Threshold
Support(0.07%)
789.53K DOT
Issuance
1.15B DOT
Vote
15fFP_TyyT6Oct 12, 2024

Testing

15fFP_TyyT6Oct 11, 2024

Testing

15fFP_TyyT6Oct 11, 2024

[Deleted]

15fFP_TyyT6Oct 11, 2024

[Deleted]

mridul_aryaMar 1, 2024

[Deleted]

mridul_aryaMar 1, 2024

[Deleted]

OpenGovAssistAug 13, 2023

Hello,

We are in the process of validating a true need for a service to assist teams with crafting and completing successful treasury proposals, so they can focus on building. We would love to hear about your experience with this proposal. If you are willing to take a few minutes, please fill out this form about your experience with the OpenGov treasury proposal process: https://forms.gle/MwDij4adXEQd7Um79

Feel free to leave out any details that your team is not comfortable with sharing, but the more info you can provide, the better we will be able to assess the potential need for our services.

For more info, follow us on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/OpenGovAssist

kryptoschainJul 7, 2023

Hi Coinstudio / Abdulbee,

Sorry I'm a bit late in providing some feedback here.
I want to say I love the work that has been put in to create professional proposal templates that allow reviewers & voters to get an in depth idea of why a proposal should get funding, by adding multiple sections that should be covered such as milestones, funding, team and follow-up plans. 

I also agree it's better to request funding upfront for these audits because having been part of it myself, I believe it would have been challenging to request funding for work already done given there was a chance it could also fail and that means the auditor had spent their time in vain. 

I'm very miniscule in terms of voting power, but I do support this proposal because you clearly turned Open Gov from the Wild Wild West, into a more Modern Web3 structure.

Good job & good luck!

Claudio (KryptosChain)

CCTFJun 27, 2023

CCTF supports this proposal, audits are very helpful for the community and just like security audits, these ones should be implemented too. Bonus kudos for the very friendly DOT amount requested!

polkadot-key-0xa02f7333e2

Dear Will | Paradox,

I appreciate your feedback, and I understand your concerns. Education, as you know, is a long-term process, and it's not always easy to see immediate results. However, I want to say that we have already seen some progress. Several proposers have started to utilize our proposal document template, and we've observed that their proposals are clearer and more structured. This is a positive trend that we believe will continue to grow as more people start to use it.

In terms of the audit scores, you are correct that voting is independent of these scores. But our aim with the audits is not to dictate voting, but to provide feedback to improve the proposal context that could assist voters in their decision-making process.

As for your suggestion of a rating system integrated into Subsquare or Polkassembly, I agree that it would be an excellent feature. In fact, we are currently in ongoing collaborations to incorporate audit reports into Polkassembly, a step in the direction you mentioned. This collaboration extends to other related materials such as including AAG videos in treasury proposals. You can see this under the Audit tab above (example). As for additional user interaction options, while it's too early to go into specifics, we're open to exploring this in the future.

Thank you for your ongoing support and understanding. All feedback is incredibly valuable to us as it helps us improve and adapt our initiative to better serve the community.

Kind regards, CS

@Coinstudio I understand that you'll be at AAG on Thursday. I'll try my best to attend and reply to these in detail.

It isn't a topic that I would like to lose too much time on given that the vote is already decided. I would however appeal to your 'good sense' that both you and Abdulbee can focus your efforts to things that would add more value to governance.

Dear Will | Paradox,

I appreciate your feedback, and I understand your concerns. Education, as you know, is a long-term process, and it's not always easy to see immediate results. However, I want to say that we have already seen some progress. Several proposers have started to utilize our proposal document template, and we've observed that their proposals are clearer and more structured. This is a positive trend that we believe will continue to grow as more people start to use it.

In terms of the audit scores, you are correct that voting is independent of these scores. But our aim with the audits is not to dictate voting, but to provide feedback to improve the proposal context that could assist voters in their decision-making process.

As for your suggestion of a rating system integrated into Subsquare or Polkassembly, I agree that it would be an excellent feature. In fact, we are currently in ongoing collaborations to incorporate audit reports into Polkassembly, a step in the direction you mentioned. This collaboration extends to other related materials such as including AAG videos in treasury proposals. You can see this under the Audit tab above (example). As for additional user interaction options, while it's too early to go into specifics, we're open to exploring this in the future.

Thank you for your ongoing support and understanding. All feedback is incredibly valuable to us as it helps us improve and adapt our initiative to better serve the community.

Kind regards, CS

@Coinstudio I understand that you'll be at AAG on Thursday. I'll try my best to attend and reply to these in detail.

It isn't a topic that I would like to lose too much time on given that the vote is already decided. I would however appeal to your 'good sense' that both you and Abdulbee can focus your efforts to things that would add more value to governance.

@16f2...7VTU

Thank you for your kind words and support.

To answer the question of integration with governance frontends, I agree with it as it is a significant step forward that we're actively working on. You may have noticed the newly added 'Audit' tab on Polkassembly, where all content related to treasury proposals is now visible. This includes audit reports, community-created content, and AAG videos. This content is pulled from a jointly administrated GitHub repository, which is open for everyone to contribute to and utilize. It's an ongoing process, and we're excited to see it evolve. Integration example.

As for your question about payment, this proposal does indeed include payment upfront for 20 audits per auditor. The only reason behind this approach is to help bootstrap the initiative on the Polkadot network. After these initial audits, we intend to revert to the same funding model used in Kusama, with audits paid via tips.

Thank you again for your constructive comments and questions. We appreciate your engagement and interest in this project.

Best regards, CS

Jun 15, 2023

@16f2...7VTU

Thank you for your kind words and support.

To answer the question of integration with governance frontends, I agree with it as it is a significant step forward that we're actively working on. You may have noticed the newly added 'Audit' tab on Polkassembly, where all content related to treasury proposals is now visible. This includes audit reports, community-created content, and AAG videos. This content is pulled from a jointly administrated GitHub repository, which is open for everyone to contribute to and utilize. It's an ongoing process, and we're excited to see it evolve. Integration example.

As for your question about payment, this proposal does indeed include payment upfront for 20 audits per auditor. The only reason behind this approach is to help bootstrap the initiative on the Polkadot network. After these initial audits, we intend to revert to the same funding model used in Kusama, with audits paid via tips.

Thank you again for your constructive comments and questions. We appreciate your engagement and interest in this project.

Best regards, CS

polkadot-key-0xfa2ee01899

Awesome to see such a useful community member take the first step in writing up the first referendum on opengov on polkadot!

Personally I have loved the passion + utility of this project, and would be glad to support it.

I do also echo the sentiment of Will above - for truly getting utility of this project, I would like to see a clearer path to integration with the governance frontends that most people use. Thats the 0 --> 1 change thats incredibly significant.

I would also want to end with a question: What has changed compared to Kusama where the audits are paid via small bounties per audit vs. now getting paid upfront?

.

Awesome to see such a useful community member take the first step in writing up the first referendum on opengov on polkadot!

Personally I have loved the passion + utility of this project, and would be glad to support it.

I do also echo the sentiment of Will above - for truly getting utility of this project, I would like to see a clearer path to integration with the governance frontends that most people use. Thats the 0 --> 1 change thats incredibly significant.

I would also want to end with a question: What has changed compared to Kusama where the audits are paid via small bounties per audit vs. now getting paid upfront?

.

Dear Will | Paradox,

I appreciate your feedback, and I understand your concerns. Education, as you know, is a long-term process, and it's not always easy to see immediate results. However, I want to say that we have already seen some progress. Several proposers have started to utilize our proposal document template, and we've observed that their proposals are clearer and more structured. This is a positive trend that we believe will continue to grow as more people start to use it.

In terms of the audit scores, you are correct that voting is independent of these scores. But our aim with the audits is not to dictate voting, but to provide feedback to improve the proposal context that could assist voters in their decision-making process.

As for your suggestion of a rating system integrated into Subsquare or Polkassembly, I agree that it would be an excellent feature. In fact, we are currently in ongoing collaborations to incorporate audit reports into Polkassembly, a step in the direction you mentioned. This collaboration extends to other related materials such as including AAG videos in treasury proposals. You can see this under the Audit tab above (example). As for additional user interaction options, while it's too early to go into specifics, we're open to exploring this in the future.

Thank you for your ongoing support and understanding. All feedback is incredibly valuable to us as it helps us improve and adapt our initiative to better serve the community.

Kind regards, CS

Jun 15, 2023

Dear Will | Paradox,

I appreciate your feedback, and I understand your concerns. Education, as you know, is a long-term process, and it's not always easy to see immediate results. However, I want to say that we have already seen some progress. Several proposers have started to utilize our proposal document template, and we've observed that their proposals are clearer and more structured. This is a positive trend that we believe will continue to grow as more people start to use it.

In terms of the audit scores, you are correct that voting is independent of these scores. But our aim with the audits is not to dictate voting, but to provide feedback to improve the proposal context that could assist voters in their decision-making process.

As for your suggestion of a rating system integrated into Subsquare or Polkassembly, I agree that it would be an excellent feature. In fact, we are currently in ongoing collaborations to incorporate audit reports into Polkassembly, a step in the direction you mentioned. This collaboration extends to other related materials such as including AAG videos in treasury proposals. You can see this under the Audit tab above (example). As for additional user interaction options, while it's too early to go into specifics, we're open to exploring this in the future.

Thank you for your ongoing support and understanding. All feedback is incredibly valuable to us as it helps us improve and adapt our initiative to better serve the community.

Kind regards, CS

coinstudioJun 15, 2023

Dear Will | Paradox,

I appreciate your feedback, and I understand your concerns. Education, as you know, is a long-term process, and it's not always easy to see immediate results. However, I want to say that we have already seen some progress. Several proposers have started to utilize our proposal document template, and we've observed that their proposals are clearer and more structured. This is a positive trend that we believe will continue to grow as more people start to use it.

In terms of the audit scores, you are correct that voting is independent of these scores. But our aim with the audits is not to dictate voting, but to provide feedback to improve the proposal context that could assist voters in their decision-making process.

As for your suggestion of a rating system integrated into Subsquare or Polkassembly, I agree that it would be an excellent feature. In fact, we are currently in ongoing collaborations to incorporate audit reports into Polkassembly, a step in the direction you mentioned. This collaboration extends to other related materials such as including AAG videos in treasury proposals. You can see this under the Audit tab above (example). As for additional user interaction options, while it's too early to go into specifics, we're open to exploring this in the future.

Thank you for your ongoing support and understanding. All feedback is incredibly valuable to us as it helps us improve and adapt our initiative to better serve the community.

Kind regards, CS

Awesome to see such a useful community member take the first step in writing up the first referendum on opengov on polkadot!

Personally I have loved the passion + utility of this project, and would be glad to support it.

I do also echo the sentiment of Will above - for truly getting utility of this project, I would like to see a clearer path to integration with the governance frontends that most people use. Thats the 0 --> 1 change thats incredibly significant.

I would also want to end with a question: What has changed compared to Kusama where the audits are paid via small bounties per audit vs. now getting paid upfront?

Jun 15, 2023

Awesome to see such a useful community member take the first step in writing up the first referendum on opengov on polkadot!

Personally I have loved the passion + utility of this project, and would be glad to support it.

I do also echo the sentiment of Will above - for truly getting utility of this project, I would like to see a clearer path to integration with the governance frontends that most people use. Thats the 0 --> 1 change thats incredibly significant.

I would also want to end with a question: What has changed compared to Kusama where the audits are paid via small bounties per audit vs. now getting paid upfront?

Dear Coin,

This was a good experiment that I supported with each proposal on Kusama. However, having seen the results I don't think this initiative is adding any value. Proposals are still of very poor quality and voting is independent of 'audit score'. I appreciate that the auditors are putting forward an effort but it is imo not sustainable or an initiative I would continue to support.

What might be more sustainable is a rating system built into Subsquare and or Polkassembly. Something that's not too overwhelming but gives the proposer a feel of particular pain points with the proposal.

I continue to extend my respect to yourself and Abdulbee for all the good efforts you've delivered in the past. If this is funding for a hard-stop I would reconsider my vote. I am only one vote in a sea of larger voters, I wish you all the best.

Regards, Will | Paradox

Jun 15, 2023

Dear Coin,

This was a good experiment that I supported with each proposal on Kusama. However, having seen the results I don't think this initiative is adding any value. Proposals are still of very poor quality and voting is independent of 'audit score'. I appreciate that the auditors are putting forward an effort but it is imo not sustainable or an initiative I would continue to support.

What might be more sustainable is a rating system built into Subsquare and or Polkassembly. Something that's not too overwhelming but gives the proposer a feel of particular pain points with the proposal.

I continue to extend my respect to yourself and Abdulbee for all the good efforts you've delivered in the past. If this is funding for a hard-stop I would reconsider my vote. I am only one vote in a sea of larger voters, I wish you all the best.

Regards, Will | Paradox

Jun 15, 2023

test

Powered by Subsocial