Polkassembly Logo

Create Pencil IconCreate
OpenGov

Notice: Polkadot has migrated to AssetHub. Balances, data, referenda, and other on-chain activity has moved to AssetHub.Learn more

View All Medium Spender

Refund of Early OpenGov Submission Deposits

inMedium Spender
23 days ago
Executed

Summary:
Requesting reimbursement of the submission deposits for the first OpenGov referenda on Kusama, submitted at a time when the deposit was set at 100 KSM. These referenda proposed by RTTI-5220, VALLETECH, and ENCOINTER were all rejected or timed out, resulting in deposits that remain permanently locked on-chain.

Context:
During the early OpenGov rollout, the submission deposit was disproportionately high compared to today’s 0.0333 KSM. This proposal seeks to refund those early deposits, minus the current standard submission fee, as a fair recognition of the experimental conditions under which they were made.

The affected referenda are:

  • Referendum 0
  • Referendum 1
  • Referendum 2
  • Referendum 9

Rationale:
While the refundSubmissionDeposit function exists and can be initiated on the Root track, it cannot be used to recover these funds in practice. The call ultimately fails due to BadOrigin, and attempting the same via a signed extrinsic also fails, since rejected and timed-out referenda are not in a valid state for deposit recovery.

Screenshot 2025-10-30 at 10.19.17.png

As Gavin explained:

“In general, the submission deposit should not be returned until the proposal is no longer in state. Unfortunately, due to how the voting/locking/delegation mechanism works, this information may need to remain in state for up to the maximum conviction period, and it’s non-trivial to determine when it’s safe to release it.”

Given that these deposits are technically unrecoverable through the refund function, the only fair and technically sound path without changing the underlying logic is to compensate them through the treasury.

Note: Cross-checking past treasury payouts confirms that none of the affected proposers ever received reimbursement for their original submission deposits.

Comments (7)

22 days ago

Thank you for submitting this @otar

22 days ago

Dear Proposer,

Thank you for your proposal. Our first vote on this proposal is AYE. Below is the evaluation of our voting policy v0.3 on this referendum:

MEDIUM SPENDER
--------------
8 available members
🟢 4 • 🔴 0 • ⚪️ 0
✓ ≥50.0% required participation met
▶ Ayes >50.0% of all votes
🟢 AYE

Below is a summary of our members' comments:

Members supported refunding early submission deposits, noting the need for fairness given the disproportionate amounts paid during experimental times. They emphasized that the funds rightfully belonged to proposers and should be reclaimed since the deposits remained locked due to technical constraints preventing normal refunds. The voters appreciated the initiative to compensate the losses via the treasury and recognized it as a correction of a past oversight. Their comments reflected a consensus that the measure was justified as a way to rectify earlier procedural limitations, ensuring that those who risked higher costs during the early rollout received what was fairly owed to them.

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 V Delegate

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

Load more comments
PleaseLogin to comment

Requested

DOT
39.99K DOT

Proposal Passed

Summary

0%

Aye

AyeNay

0%

Nay

Aye (33)0.0 DOT

Support0.0 DOT

Nay (2)0.0 DOT

Help Center

Report an Issue
Feedback
Terms and Conditions
Github

Our Services

Docs
Terms of Website
Privacy Policy

A House of Commons Initiative.

Polka Labs Private Limited 2025

All rights reserved.

Terms and ConditionsTerms of Website
Privacy Policy