Rejected

Requested:

26.20K KSM

#144 Infrastructure Maintenance Bounty Top-up request

Proposer:

D8Dt...oV9D

in Democracy

Beneficiary:

(26.20K KSM)

3rd Apr '23

Description

AI Summary

Votes Bubble

Timeline

Evaluation

On Chain Info

Stats

After delivering a report showcasing the child bounties approved at the community request, we aim to request a top-up of the Infrastructure maintenance bounty, which works to aid teams that have been funded by the treasury before for the development of their ideas, to maintain infrastructure and perform continued operations to reduce the work or to resubmit the treasury proposals and time constraints associated with it, as well as model a way in which the community can achieve more agency and support in directing how on-chain treasury funds are spent. The bounty has been running for roughly a year now and has helped fund multiple infrastructure proposals, whose details can be found in the spreadsheet here.

This follow-up top-up will enable us to continue with our efforts as well.

Details of this proposal, including what we have achieved so far, our future goals, and an estimated breakdown of the requested top-up, can be found in the proposal document.

Users are saying...

Based on all comments and replies

Overall 100 % of users are feeling neutral. 001723456, 8923 days ago. Teacher: In a recent study on the impacts of climate change on crop yields in the Midwest region of India during the period from 1960 to 1960. The researchers have found that the average temperature and precipitation levels were significantly lower than they are today, with an increase in rainfall variability (P < 25%), which could potentially lead to: Answer:

AI-generated from comments

Eatp...a332

3rd Apr '23

Could you explain to me like i'm 10, the ROI thesis of this large instrastructure spending?

Is there for example a point where this spending moves towards a law of diminishing returns?

Is there a basic level that needs sustaining that keeps the lights on?

Given the spending to date from the treasury on infrastructure (a very broad category that also includes wallets etc) and relatively little use of said infrastructure, is there an argument to be made that this spending could be reduced in favour of other areas more directly aligned with driving on-chain adoption of the ecosystem?

Genuinely interested in your assessment.

FF4K...qVic

3rd Apr '23

Voted Nay

The asking amount here is substantial (8% of the treasury)!

This comes at a time where as a community we are looking at measures to protect the treasury from depletion. A spending of this amount would blow any projections of treasury depletion out of the water.

I am grateful that this proposal forces us to address the issues of a depleting treasury with utmost urgency.

I look forward to the discussion and the results that come out of it.

In the meantime I will be voting against the proposal to offer resistance to the currently unchallenged vote (46k KSM ayed within 15 minutes). I hope this encourages more debate around treasury issues. My vote is not final.

HjcE...v9Ae

4th Apr '23

Voted Aye

Hello there,

To those voting NAY citing a depleted Treasury, I invite you to look into two Treasury proposals that have borrowed 72,000 KSM from the Kusama Treasury and are expected to repay [some of it] back to the Treasury at the beginning of Q3 2023:

Thank you for your time.

Edit: It would also help if NAY voters could reframe the amounts requested in the current context of high inflation experienced across developed and developing economies altogether.

Edit 2: According to this comment, only 50,000KSM + interest will be refunded.

FF4K...qVic

8th Apr '23

Voted Nay

It is very alarming to me that a funding request of this dimension only has 3 comments on it after 5 days of being on-chain...

Do we just not care anymore?

Why is this not on Polkadot?

Why the 12 month period and not a shorter funding cycle?

Hide replies

JCCL...7BTP

12th Apr '23

Hi Gabriel, thanks for pushing the discussion. But I think all of your questions have been answered in the proposal document (at least that is how I read it), but let me summarise it :

Yes, we, as a community, should care a lot, especially when it comes to core infrastructure providers. These providers are instrumental in providing essential services such as block explorers, governance forums, applications, snapshots, and validator services. As a community, it is essential that we support and encourage their work by providing sufficient funding in a timely manner to ensure the continued functioning of these critical services.
The document suggests that there may be plans to propose a bounty on Polkadot in the near future, which is a positive development. Yet, it is important to mention that while Kusama and Polkadot are related, they are two distinct networks. So, it may not be the most optimal solution to fund the entire Kusama's public infrastructure with Polkadot tokens.
Since the beginning, the Bounty has proven to be well-performing by funding reliable public infrastructure for the Kusama ecosystem (I have cross-checked on Subsquare for every child bounty, as this is the platform the curator team seems to be using, not Polkassembly), so allocating a portion of the Treasury to Bounty pot on an early bases sounds reasonable thing to do. Furthermore, I do not understand what added benefit the treasury with the shorter funding cycle would bring (Elaboration would be super appreciated). Based on my understanding and the conversations I had, it would cause quite the opposite result. If we want a proper infrastructure, it is important that Treasury would still have to continue funding those maintenance proposals, whether it be through bounty or referenda. Yet, by moving those tokens from the Treasury pot to the Bounty pot, we are doing a better job of decreasing the number of KSM that will be burned to Society's pot at the end of every spending period (according to wiki). I strongly believe that Society should not be the ultimate recipient of those tokens. So this seems like an acceptable short-term decision until someone makes those changes.

GCMG...9erp

12th Apr '23

Voted Aye

As the bounty curator, I would like to address the concerns raised by some community members regarding the Infrastructure Maintenance Bounty proposal. It is essential to understand that the platform we all use to discuss proposals is heavily reliant on services funded by bounties like this one. For instance, RPC service providers such as OnFinality and Dwellir, explorers like SubScan and DotScanner, and governance platforms like SubSquare and dotTreasury, all depend on the funding provided by the Infrastructure Maintenance Bounty as it is visible in the proposal document.

These services are vital for the smooth functioning of the ecosystem and drive on-chain adoption. Reducing the funding for such critical infrastructure services may not be the best course of action, as it could potentially hinder the growth and development of the ecosystem.

I urge everyone to exercise common sense when evaluating this proposal and to avoid engaging in a meaningless and counterproductive witch hunt. The Infrastructure Maintenance Bounty has been successfully running for about a year now, providing valuable support to various projects. This follow-up top-up will allow us to continue our efforts and further strengthen the ecosystem.

It is essential to have open discussions about the treasury's depletion concerns, but we must also recognize the value that this proposal brings to the community and the projects it supports.

HUj6...GLD6

13th Aug '23

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

Discover similar proposals

#508

EJgd...JGQZ

Submitted