Tip for an account used for Referendum Deposit Clean-up and Validator Payout Bot
Beneficiary:Dear community,
I would like your support to fund an account used for common good activities with 333 KSM, near the upper limit of this track. Based on current projections this should fund said activities for beyond 12 months. I hope that the community trust that I would use the funds responsibly should they become in-excess.
The account is used in-part for activities such as:
- Paying out staking rewards for several validators and their nominators
- Refunding submission and decision deposits for several referenda on Kusama and the Collective chain
- The account was previously funded by the Treasury 5-6 months ago. There are now many more payouts per era as more validators are active and there is a higher drain on funds.
It is worthwhile noting that the account has no outbound transfers and most (if not all) expenses on the account are transactional in nature; this means that 80% of the fees are returned to the treasury.
The account balance graph is shown below.
Regards,
Will | Paradox | ParaNodes.io
Comments (2)
Proposal Passed
3
of 3Summary
0%
Aye
0%
Nay
Aye (41)0.0 DOT
Support0.0 DOT
Nay (1)0.0 DOT
Voting Data
Approval%
Support%
Threshold0.00%
Threshold0.00%
Hey Kusamaxi,
The bot was setup many years ago and was not marketed as a the de-facto solution for validator payouts. It offers some economic relief to those who don't want to manage validator payouts themselves. Validators can also use this as a backup to their own systems.
I think your points related to downtime are overstated and perhaps if you took an empirical approach you may find downtime is not as bad as you're making it out to be. In any case, if you're unsatisfied, you can just operate your own bot/script.
Regards,
Dear Proposer,
Thank you for your proposal. Our first vote on this proposal is AYE.
The Small Spender track requires 50% participation and simple majority of non-abstain voters according to our voting policy v0.2, and any referendum in which the majority of members vote abstain receives an abstain vote. This proposal has received five aye and zero nay votes from ten available members. Below is a summary of our members' comments:
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