Executed

Requested:

7.93K KSM

#445 Bounty top-up of the System Parachain Collators funding on Kusama

Proposer:

CbaN...YFGN

in General

Beneficiary:

(7.93K KSM)

24th Aug '24

Description

AI Summary

Votes Bubble

Timeline

Evaluation

On Chain Info

Stats

This is a proposal for a bounty top-up of the System Parachain Collators funding on Kusama. We are repeating this proposal since the referenda failed, in part due to last minute vote changed due to accusation of double spending. We hope to address this with this video and with the revised parts of the initial proposal. In addition - after the last proposal it was suggested that we elect a coordinator, which we did. Since Paradox has been doing this task for the past year he was suggested and endorsed as the coordinator. Furthermore - the market rate has since changed dramatically and we hope to be better aligned with the "new market rate" with the revised budget.

This funding will cover AssetHub, BridgeHub, Coretime, People and Encointer System Parachains on Kusama. This proposal supplements the original System Parachain Collator Proposal, and continues the proposal for System Parachain funding, aiming to incentivize the best performance, minimize censorship, and maintain liveliness by securing treasury funding for the operational costs of Kusama System Parachain Collators. Furthermore it expands its scope to three new System Parachains — Coretime, People and Encointer. Additionally — it introduces newly established methodology of selection criteria for invulnerable collator spots, as well as newly established bidding procedure for securing permissionless spots. All of this is detailed out in the Proposal document.

Funding Request: Infrastructure Costs and Staking Rewards Coverage: Five Kusama System Parachains (AssetHub, BridgeHub, Coretime, People and Encointer) Duration: 6-month runway Start Date: July 1, 2024 Funding Amount: 7,926.62 KSM for Kusama System Parachains

Note: Unlike most other treasury spends, this spend funds a bounty. If there is a disagreement with any particular portion of the budget we can not disburse it or return that portion to the Treasury. There are also some budget items that are provisional (like development, price fluctuation, administrative) and these are all reallocated to primary services if not used for the intended purpose.

Users are saying...

Based on all comments and replies

The text discusses a proposal for collator selection in Polkadot and Kusama networks, suggesting approximately 20 collators per system chain, with 15 being 'Invulnerable' and five elected by bond. The author commends the effort made to update the proposal but abstains from voting due to a conflict of interest as an active participant in the ecosystem. The text also mentions a large Kusama token holder, known as the Chaotic Entity, who holds nearly 400,000 KSM and could potentially influence voting outcomes. The author encourages others to consider supporting the proposal to ensure the 'will of the people' prevails over...See More

The text discusses a proposal regarding collator selection in the Polkadot and Kusama networks, suggesting approximately 20 collators per system chain, with 15 being 'Invulnerable' and five elected by bond. However, due to a conflict of interest, the author has decided to abstain from voting on this proposal. The author expresses concern that voting in favor could lead to accusations of preferential treatment or grifting, while voting against might result in being blacklisted. Despite this, it's emphasized that there is no blacklist and selection follows the rules of the chain. A large KSM holder known as the 'Chaotic Entity'...See More

AI-generated from comments

JFAr...nYVt

26th Aug '24

Voted Aye

Can you add some contextual information please?

Hide replies

JFAr...nYVt

26th Aug '24

@Bill

Note that contextual information is available on Subsquare -

https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/445

CbaN...YFGN

26th Aug '24

Voted Aye

For some reason ref 445 is not showing on polkassembly for me so I used subsquare, but apparently they don't sync.
I was however able to access it via direct link, but I am unable to edit the context due error 'Post not found on-chain. Something went wrong.'

We'll try to debug with polkassembly team soon🙏🏻

Dm4u...1Xkk

26th Aug '24

We need fewer collators on Kusama. Kusama is not big enough to support this infrastructure. I voted AYE for such proposal, but longterm it's not a sustainable solution, we need to compare it with the size of network. Be real! Who is in charge of this bounty and managing it, why so much overspending?

D2pf...6JKx

27th Aug '24

For the robustness and stability of the nodes in the system chain, there is a high risk involved in proposing solutions. Please handle this matter in a more scientific way. For example, in the case of insufficient trading volume, seeking specialized funds through upward communication.

DG8Q...5nFh

28th Aug '24

Hello, on behalf of the AIWeb3 DAO (the most vibrant Chinese community within the Dotsama ecosystem, with the mission to amplify the voice of the Chinese-speaking community and support Chinese content creators, ensuring it plays a pivotal role in shaping the future of Dotsama eco),

We sincerely invite you to join our Twitter Space which is held every Tuesday at 10 AM (UTC+8) on our official Twitter: https://x.com/aiweb3dao. Please join our Telegram group if you have any questions, English TG group: https://t.me/aiweb3dao_eng and Chinese TG group: https://t.me/aiweb3dao

Comments: we have discussed this proposal in the community, and some community members had question about why there is a need for 12 collators (not less as the kusama is not busy for now? ) for each system chain, it would be great if you can show up in our twitter space next week and explain it to the community.

您好，我代表AIWeb3 DAO，这个波卡生态中最具活力的中文社区，旨在放大中文社区的声音，支持中文内容创作者，确保其在塑造波卡未来中发挥重要作用。我们特地邀请你们参加我们的Twitter空间是每周二上午10点（UTC+8），在我们的官方推特：https://x.com/aiweb3dao. 。如有任何问题，请加入我们的Telegram讨论：英文Telegram https://t.me/aiweb3dao_eng ，中文 TG group: https://t.me/aiweb3dao。

HqRc...fVZn

28th Aug '24

Dear @PromoTeam Validator and @Web3 edu and investment

At the time the bounty was created, we were informed by the respective dev team that ideal number of collators was around twelve. It is my understanding that this count arouse due to guidance from an SR Labs report/audit.

While it is true that a chain can operate with fewer collators, given the importance of system chains as shared resources I think it best that it operate as close to ideal with least risk of censorship.

@PromoTeam Validator I appreciate the perspective of curtailing overall spending. Despite this we also need to consider that spending is still required to keep the lights on. I see collation, validation and reasonable spending on RPC all falling within this bracket.

The earnings of each collator is not purely profit, there are expenses and time involved on the part of the node operator. I have aspirations of "getting more" from the node operators of System Collators as part of a "Make Kusama great again" strategy. I'll happily share in private.

@D2pf...6JKx I'm not quite sure as to what you're suggesting. Perhaps some form of alternative funding? Could you polish the English please?

Regards, Will | Paradox | System Collator Coordinator

Et9M...r1C9

28th Aug '24

Voted Aye

@PromoTeam_Validator in addition to what @paradox writes; the ideas about the number of collators also come from the relevant polkadot-fellows rfc: "system collator selection":

Collators selected by governance SHOULD have a reasonable expectation that the Treasury will reimburse their operating costs.

In order to achieve the requirements listed under Motivation, it is reasonable to have approximately: 20 collators per system chain,of which 15 are Invulnerable, and five are elected by bond.

Of course one could discuss if this is as relevant to kusama as it is to polkadot in light of the discussion of liveliness of both networks. From a rpc perspective; I run public rpc services for both kusama and polkadot and they do not differ that much in number of calls, so there certainly is also liveliness on kusama.

DDCN...23EF

30th Aug '24

Voted Abstain

I appreciate and wish to commend the effort the team has made to update the proposal and for creating a video and appointing a System Collator Coordinator. Unfortunately I have realised that I will have to vote abstain, as I have a current and future conflict of interest (COI) in that I have actively participated across the ecosystem in the capacity of being a permissionless collator and a validator in the past, continue to do so at present, and I also wish to continue doing so in the future on any chain, including System Parachains.

An example of why I believe a COI exists is because if I were to vote AYE on this proposal then in future if I applied to be a permissionless collator on a System Parachain then there is the possibility that the community could perceive my selection as being due to preferential treatment and engage in publicly shaming and labelling it as grifting or similar equivalent, even if that was not true, particularly given that locking tokens as a permissionless collator could lead to a passive financial opportunity cost and staking rewards compensation, which could negatively impact my reputation and future governance prospects.

On the flip side, I believe that if I were to vote NAY again (not that I believe I would wish to do so) and not that think I would, then I believe that could cause me to be included in a blacklist (if I haven't already been included in one based on https://kusama.polkassembly.io/referenda/419) and not be eligible in the selection process for invitation as a permissionless collator or validator across the ecosystem, including on these System Parachains once permissionless spots start opening up.

Hide replies

HqRc...fVZn

31st Aug '24

@ltfschoen

Thank you for the honest feedback. I would like to assure you that there is no blacklist, permissionless selection abides by the rules of the chain and invulnerable selection is defined per the rules of the proposal.

We are however facing a difficult task of voting against the opinion of a large bag holder known as the Chaotic Entity. Per the outcome of referenda 420, he has the capability of voting with nearly 400,000 KSM.

I would like you to consider voting in support of the proposal should it enter confirmation. Not necessarily as a show of personal interest but one to ensure that the "will of the people" superceedes the will of the "Entity"