candidates

members

proficients

fellows

senior_fellows

experts

senior_experts

masters

senior_masters

grand_masters

Miscellaneous

Deterministic, Audit-Ready On-Chain Financial Reporting for Polkadot Treasury &amp; DAOs

Deterministic, Audit-Ready On-Chain Financial Reporting for Polkadot Treasury & DAOs

The Kus Public Review &amp; AMA: 2022 - 2025

Andrey McQ

The Kus Public Review & AMA: 2022 - 2025

AAG 2.0 for the Second Age of Polkadot

RocoDotcast

The Forum serves as a digital town square to co-create the future of Polkadot by the ecosystem, for the ecosystem. Suggestions on how to improve the Forum live here.

The Forum serves as a digital town square to co-create the future of Polkadot by the ecosystem, for the ecosystem. Suggestions on how to improve the Forum live here.

Polkadot Forum Meta

Welcome to the Polkadot Forum :waving_hand:

Rajesh Shirsagar

Welcome to the Polkadot Forum 👋

Getting started: Read this first

Polkadot Forum Super Admin

Forum Anonimity and Gov Research

If you’re looking for discussion or discourse for anything and all things Tech related, then this is the place for you. .

Tech Talk

If you got hacked

Daniel

Subctl: Looking for feedback on a new CLI tool

Experimenting with Homomorphic Encryption on PVM

Bastian Köcher

Whether you’re new to Polkadot’s Governance or an OpenGov OG, this is the place for you to get involved and join the discussion.

Governance

[WFC] Burn-Based Tokenomics for Kusama: The Ethereum Model, Not a Hard Cap

RFC-0162 (PR #162): Ecosystem Anti-Trust &amp; Market Structure Omnibus — Review Thread

Diego

RFC-0162 (PR #162): Ecosystem Anti-Trust & Market Structure Omnibus — Review Thread

Decentralized Voices Cohort 5 Application - Light Track: GoverNoun AI Governance Agent

Luke

If you’re looking for discussion or discourse for anything and all things Ecosystem, then this is the place for you. .

Ecosystem

Polkadot Digest 21 January 2026

Radhakrishna Dasari

Mimir Sunset Announcement

welcome

Interoperability is Now a Fiduciary Mandate

If you’re looking for discussion or discourse for anything and all things Ambassador related, then this is the place for you. .

Ambassador Programme

Polkadot Ambassador Fellowship (PAF) Governance: Critical Questions Before On-Chain Implementation

Transition to the On-Chain Collective: Next Steps for the Ambassador Fellowship

Official statement of the Advisory Board of the Polkadot Ambassador Fellowship

If you’re looking for a resource, FAQ or guide, then this is the place to be. We urge all users of the forum to try and use this category when needed.

Resources & FAQs

How to P&lt;&gt;K bridge USDT or USDC

Alain Brenzikofer

How to P<>K bridge USDT or USDC

Asset Hub Migration - XCM FAQ

Remy Le Berre

Asset Hub Migration - Balances FAQ

These are all just cheap excuses. Bill is definitely trolling you, because where is the solution to his multi-year account?
Why hasn’t he, or the W3F, hired any economists yet? That would be his job, wouldn’t it? And why didn’t he support Kusama’s takeover of the Polkadot maximum supply limit referendum at the time?
Why does he criticize committed individuals who are merely trying to fill the vacuum that the W3F itself has created with its inaction?
Quite simply, it proves that he and the W3F have no idea how to move forward with Kusama, or why is there no statement from the W3F on Kusama and urgent economic reforms?

<h2><a name="p-37293-polkadot-news-1" class="anchor" href="#p-37293-polkadot-news-1" aria-label="Heading link"></a>Polkadot News</h2>
Registration for Polkadot Singapore Codecamp on January 27th and 29th is now open <a href="https://x.com/openguildwtf/status/2013552139063435536" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://x.com/openguildwtf/status/2013552139063435536</a>
Registration for Polkadot India Codecamp on February 1st is now open <a href="https://x.com/openguildwtf/status/2013914495572443196" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://x.com/openguildwtf/status/2013914495572443196</a>
The referendum requesting funding for OmniAvavatar, building a cross-game, cross-engine, chain-agnostic digital identity layer, is currently failing <a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1830" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1830</a>
<h2><a name="p-37293-kusama-news-2" class="anchor" href="#p-37293-kusama-news-2" aria-label="Heading link"></a>Kusama News</h2>
There are currently three referenda up for voting on Kusama OpenGov, which include the addition of a new registrar, the KSM burn mechanisms proposal on the WFC track, and protocol changes to improve parachain block production <a href="https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda</a>

Yeah, I’m Chinese <img src="https://emoji.discourse-cdn.com/twitter/grin.png?v=15" title=":grin:" class="emoji" alt=":grin:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">

Hello Polkadot community
I’m Marco, working on ProofLedger, a tool focused on generating deterministic, audit-ready financial reporting directly from on-chain data.
I’d like to open a discussion around a recurring issue I’ve observed across Polkadot Treasury proposals, DAOs, and ecosystem teams.
The Problem: On-chain Governance, Off-chain Accounting
Polkadot has one of the most advanced on-chain governance systems in the industry:
<ul>
<li>
OpenGov with multiple tracks
</li>
<li>
Fully on-chain Treasury execution
</li>
<li>
Transparent proposal history
</li>
<li>
Automatic, trustless enforcement
</li>
</ul>
However, when it comes to financial reporting and audits, a gap still exists:
<ul>
<li>
Treasury expenditures are visible on-chain
</li>
<li>
But accounting-grade subledgers are usually produced off-chain
</li>
<li>
Reports often require:
</li>
<li>
Manual reconciliation
</li>
<li>
CSV exports
</li>
<li>
Recalculation by auditors
</li>
<li>
Interpretation of price sources and methodologies
</li>
</ul>
This creates friction for:
<ul>
<li>
External auditors
</li>
<li>
Accountants
</li>
<li>
Legal / compliance reviews
</li>
<li>
DAO accountability to stakeholders
</li>
</ul>
In short:
on-chain transparency does not automatically equal audit-ready financial reporting.
What ProofLedger Proposes
ProofLedger is designed to bridge this gap by producing deterministic, reproducible financial reports derived entirely from on-chain data.
Key principles:
1 Deterministic Reproducibility
The same inputs (wallets, block range, scope) always produce the same outputs.
<ul>
<li>
Auditors can independently recompute results
</li>
<li>
No hidden logic or mutable dashboards
</li>
<li>
Results are verifiable, not “trusted”
</li>
</ul>
2 Full Traceability
Every reported number can be traced:
Financial summary → accounting events → individual transactions → raw blockchain data
This aligns naturally with Polkadot’s transparency-first philosophy.
3 Audit-Ready Deliverables
Instead of dashboards, the output is a formal reporting package, including:
<ul>
<li>
PDF financial report (human-readable)
</li>
<li>
CSV subledger (accounting-system ready)
</li>
<li>
Raw JSON (machine-verifiable)
</li>
<li>
Integrity hash (tamper-evidence)
</li>
</ul>
These are the formats auditors and accountants actually request.
4 Explicit Methodology &amp; Scope
Each report clearly documents:
<ul>
<li>
Calculation logic version
</li>
<li>
Price sources
</li>
<li>
Time boundaries
</li>
<li>
Known limitations
</li>
</ul>
This significantly reduces audit ambiguity and regulatory risk.
Why This Matters for Polkadot
Polkadot is already allocating significant Treasury budgets for:
<ul>
<li>
Development
</li>
<li>
Infrastructure
</li>
<li>
Security audits
</li>
<li>
Ecosystem growth
</li>
</ul>
As Treasury volume and scrutiny increase, so does the need for:
<ul>
<li>
Clear financial provenance
</li>
<li>
Reproducible audit trails
</li>
<li>
Professional-grade reporting
</li>
</ul>
Audit-ready reporting should be as on-chain-native as governance itself.
Current Status
<ul>
<li>
Initial support: Ethereum &amp; ERC20-based assets
</li>
<li>
Architecture designed for extension to:
</li>
<li>
Bitcoin
</li>
<li>
Stablecoins
</li>
<li>
Other chains based on DAO needs
</li>
</ul>
I’m intentionally starting narrow to validate real accounting and audit workflows before expanding scope.
What I’m Looking For
I’m not asking for Treasury funding at this stage.
Instead, I’d love feedback from:
<ul>
<li>
Treasury reviewers
</li>
<li>
DAO operators
</li>
<li>
Auditors / accountants working with Polkadot entities
</li>
</ul>
Questions like:
<ul>
<li>
What financial artifacts do auditors actually ask you for?
</li>
<li>
Where does reconciliation consume the most time?
</li>
<li>
What would “audit-ready” truly mean in your experience?
</li>
</ul>
If there’s interest, I’m happy to:
<ul>
<li>
Generate a sample report for a real Treasury wallet
</li>
<li>
Collaborate on defining a reporting standard suitable for Polkadot DAOs
</li>
</ul>
Closing
Polkadot has solved governance at the protocol level.
I believe the next step is solving financial accountability at the reporting level — with the same rigor and determinism.
Looking forward to your thoughts and discussion.
Marco

<a class="mention" href="/u/josep">@josep</a> Sorry to hear that, thanks for the heads up!
If you want to get a head start against the attackers we (OnFinality) can run workloads close to our Polkadot RPC nodes &amp; validators. Close as in centimetres, not kilometres. Email <a href="mailto:support@onfinality.io">support@onfinality.io</a> - it’s in Beta so there’d be no cost for a good cause
Good luck <img src="https://emoji.discourse-cdn.com/twitter/crossed_fingers.png?v=15" title=":crossed_fingers:" class="emoji" alt=":crossed_fingers:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">
Daniel

It is very likely that Ethereum will dominate most of this market, not Polkadot. Until it is implemented, JAM is pure speculation and offers no certainty. The same applies to PoP. Ultimately, only actions count, not promises or dreams.

<h2><a name="p-37264-polkadot-news-1" class="anchor" href="#p-37264-polkadot-news-1" aria-label="Heading link"></a>Polkadot News</h2>
“[Wish For Change] The Dynamic Allocation Pool (DAP) and the future of staking: Phase 1” is passing unanimously and will enter the confirmation period in a week <a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1827" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1827</a>
Check out the technical discussion around experimenting with Homomorphic Encryption on PVM <a href="https://forum.polkadot.network/t/experimenting-with-homomorphic-encryption-on-pvm/16674" class="inline-onebox">Experimenting with Homomorphic Encryption on PVM</a>
<h2><a name="p-37264-kusama-news-2" class="anchor" href="#p-37264-kusama-news-2" aria-label="Heading link"></a>Kusama News</h2>
The referendum to improve the parachain block production reliability and block times on the Kusama network is now up for voting <a href="https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/628" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/628</a>

Polkadot Digest 20 January 2025

Thanks Karim — really appreciate the detailed feedback and the comparison to cast, that’s exactly the niche I’m aiming for.
Polkadot Vault — Love this idea. Displaying QR in terminal is straightforward, but scanning the signed response back is the tricky part — camera access doesn’t work in many CLI environments (SSH, headless). Multiframe animated QR for larger payloads adds another layer of complexity. Likely approach: QR display + hex paste fallback. Definitely on the radar, just need to figure out a solution that works universally.
Generic extrinsic builder — Great suggestion, and yes absolutely open to a PR. A subxt 0.50 refactor is coming once it hits stable — I’ll post here when that’s done, would love to collaborate after that.
GitHub mirror — Appreciate the suggestion. Staying Codeberg-only for now as part of the decentralization ethos, but may revisit.

Karim | Product Engineering @ Parity

<aside class="quote no-group" data-username="burdges" data-post="6" data-topic="16674">
<div class="title">
<div class="quote-controls"></div>
<img alt="" width="24" height="24" src="https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/burdges/60/172_2.png" class="avatar"> burdges:</div>
<blockquote>
It’s painful since this digs deep into the FRAME macros, but so does NOMT integration. Rob H warned against those macros from early on. And sure enough they have chased away most teams who try building anything advanced. We could bit-the-bullet write a macro-free alternative for FRAME of course.
</blockquote>
</aside>
FRAME is operating on a key/value storage and doesn’t care about the underlying merkle tree.

I would like to share a deconstruction of the impact surface of this RFC-0162 for clarifying purposes, as exposed in the <a href="https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/RFCs/pull/162#issuecomment-3764315631" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Github thread</a>. 
⸻ 
The market, specially under decentralized economies, is holistically interdependent. This RFC-0162 treats the ecosystemic threat on institutional capture, given by the market structure (the rules of the game), within three consecutive PRs coordinated together as an Omnibus, an indivisible package of reforms on the whole structure.
With “RFC-0162: The Ecosystem Anti-Trust &amp; Market Structure Omnibus” we are proposing a single, comprehensive act to engineer fair competition and prevent institutional capture across the entire Polkadot protocol design.
This is the minimal mapping from RFC-0162’s threat model to concrete amendment points + engineering invariants; if anyone sees a better anchor for any node, I’m happy to revise the references accordingly:
<div class="lightbox-wrapper"><a class="lightbox" href="https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/uploads/polkadot2/original/2X/a/aa1e150047372f004b7d183fdd64e89b570ea436.png" data-download-href="/uploads/short-url/ogVCsYg2oioTrwo4FZ36VlRRECq.png?dl=1" title="Screenshot 2026-01-19 at 1.02.55 PM" rel="noopener nofollow ugc"><img src="https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/uploads/polkadot2/optimized/2X/a/aa1e150047372f004b7d183fdd64e89b570ea436_2_449x500.png" alt="Screenshot 2026-01-19 at 1.02.55 PM" data-base62-sha1="ogVCsYg2oioTrwo4FZ36VlRRECq" width="449" height="500" srcset="https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/uploads/polkadot2/optimized/2X/a/aa1e150047372f004b7d183fdd64e89b570ea436_2_449x500.png, https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/uploads/polkadot2/optimized/2X/a/aa1e150047372f004b7d183fdd64e89b570ea436_2_673x750.png 1.5x, https://europe1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/uploads/polkadot2/original/2X/a/aa1e150047372f004b7d183fdd64e89b570ea436.png 2x" data-dominant-color="2D2E2F"><div class="meta"><svg class="fa d-icon d-icon-far-image svg-icon" aria-hidden="true"><use href="#far-image"></use></svg>Screenshot 2026-01-19 at 1.02.55 PM697×775 69.6 KB<svg class="fa d-icon d-icon-discourse-expand svg-icon" aria-hidden="true"><use href="#discourse-expand"></use></svg></div></a></div> 
(Mermaid diagram available at the <a href="https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/RFCs/pull/162#issuecomment-3764315631" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">Github thread</a>)
⸻
Column 1: THREATS (The Risk)
Mapped to §2 (Motivation) and §3 (Threat Model).
<div class="md-table">
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Chart Node</th>
<th>RFC Text Reference</th>
<th>Context in RFC</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>F1: Contestability (Entrenchment)</td>
<td>§2 Motivation §3 Threat Model</td>
<td>Capture via incumbency entrenchment and monopolizing scarce resources (coretime).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>F2: Neutrality (Discrimination)</td>
<td>§6.2 Definition §7.3 Amendment A</td>
<td>“Discrimination” = inclusion/exclusion by non-validity attributes; neutrality is normed as common-carrier, with validity predicates only as exceptions (§6.1).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>F3: Portability (Data Lock-in)</td>
<td>§6.5 Definition §7.4, §7.6</td>
<td>“Portability” = proof-carrying export (light-client verifiable); reinforced by multi-source metadata resilience.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>F4: Exit Rights (Jamming / Lock-in)</td>
<td>§3 Threat Model §7.8 Amendment</td>
<td>Adversary “dominates exit capacity”; mitigated by rule-based queue ordering + per-controller rate limits.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>⸻
Column 2: RAILS (The Target)
Mapped to the specific RFCs being amended in §7 (Specification).
<div class="md-table">
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Chart Node</th>
<th>Target System</th>
<th>RFC Text Reference</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>CT: Coretime Market</td>
<td>RFC-0149</td>
<td>§7.7 (Anti-hoarding invariants; re-entry events + concentration friction).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>GOV: Governance Rail</td>
<td>RFC-0032</td>
<td>§7.3 (Canonical utility state neutrality; validity-only inclusion).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>EXIT: Staking/Unbond</td>
<td>RFC-0097</td>
<td>§7.8 (Exit neutrality + anti-jamming constraints).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>COL: Collator Selection</td>
<td>RFC-0007</td>
<td>§7.9 (Sunsetting invulnerables; rule-based replacement + liveness safety).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>ID: Identity System</td>
<td>RFC-0032</td>
<td>§7.4–§7.5 (Proof-carrying export; multi-attestation compatibility).</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>MD: Metadata Rail</td>
<td>RFC-0078</td>
<td>§7.6 (Anti-registry capture; multi-source resilience).</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>⸻
Column 3: FIX (The Norms)
Mapped to the engineering invariants defined in §7 (Specification).
<div class="md-table">
<table>
<thead>
<tr>
<th>Chart Node</th>
<th>RFC Text Reference</th>
<th>The Constitutional Norm</th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>I1: Contestability (Forced Re-entry + Sunset Privilege)</td>
<td>§7.7.1; §7.9</td>
<td>Periodic contestability: renewed coretime can be forced back into competition; discretionary privilege must be time-bounded and replaced by rule-based mechanisms.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I2: Neutrality (Validity Only)</td>
<td>§7.3; §6.1–§6.2</td>
<td>Common Carrier for canonical utility state: no discrimination beyond validity predicates.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I3: Portability (Proof Export + Multi-Source)</td>
<td>§7.4; §7.6; §6.5</td>
<td>Verifiable export + multi-source retrieval validated against on-chain commitments.</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>I4: Rule-Based Exit (Ordering + Per-Controller Rate Limits)</td>
<td>§7.8.1; §7.8.2</td>
<td>Unbonding must be purely rule-based, with per-controller caps and order-preserving carry-over (no privileged fast lanes).</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div> 
Last but not least, this roadmap starts by patching 0000-template.md, immediately enforcing market security considerations as a review standard for all subsequent RFCs.

This kind of thing would/should have been the killer app. Thanks for your input.

Chris T

Kacper Szarkiewicz

Decentralised Identifiers (DIDs)

No rebranding of the forum logo by the way <img src="https://emoji.discourse-cdn.com/twitter/grimacing.png?v=15" title=":grimacing:" class="emoji" alt=":grimacing:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20"> ?

Polkadot Branding Kit

They clearly replied they don’t want anyone to speak on their behalf, which cannot be avoided in public media like X. It feels like more a deliberate action unfortunately.
But It’s just how media works, your words are repeated. <img src="https://emoji.discourse-cdn.com/twitter/man_shrugging/2.png?v=15" title=":man_shrugging:t2:" class="emoji" alt=":man_shrugging:t2:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">
So no, their reply is definitely confusing about their “censorship” intents.
A brief apology would have probably been better rather than trying to make up weird explanations which are adding confusion on top of the confusion.
Anyway, i think the Community doesn’t need this currently. Let just the people speak as long as these are not insults and attacks.
Cheers <img src="https://emoji.discourse-cdn.com/twitter/clinking_beer_mugs.png?v=15" title=":clinking_beer_mugs:" class="emoji" alt=":clinking_beer_mugs:" loading="lazy" width="20" height="20">

bill_w3f

Concerns about the ecosystem&rsquo;s social networks

Concerns about the ecosystem's social networks

<h2><a name="p-37225-polkadot-news-1" class="anchor" href="#p-37225-polkadot-news-1" aria-label="Heading link"></a>Polkadot News</h2>
Polkadot Upgrade 2.0.5 referendum, which brings capped issuance of DOT, Solidity smart contracts, and two-second block time on the Hub, is passing unanimously <a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1828" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1828</a>
The referendum requesting funding for OmniAvavatar, building a cross-game, cross-engine, chain-agnostic digital identity layer, is now up for voting <a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1830" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1830</a>
The Polkadot APAC Hackathon Meetup Tour: Kuala Lumpur is happening at the Asia Pacific University of Technology &amp; Innovation on January 24th <a href="https://luma.com/mwk111mg" class="inline-onebox" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">The Polkadot APAC Hackathon Meetup Tour: Kuala Lumpur · Luma</a>
Mimir Multisig wallet will freeze feature development and move into minimal maintenance mode <a href="https://forum.polkadot.network/t/mimir-sunset-announcement/16749" class="inline-onebox">Mimir Sunset Announcement</a>
<h2><a name="p-37225-kusama-news-2" class="anchor" href="#p-37225-kusama-news-2" aria-label="Heading link"></a>Kusama News</h2>
The registrar application of <a href="http://ECHO.RE" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">ECHO.RE</a> to verify identities on the Kusama network is now up for voting <a href="https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/626" rel="noopener nofollow ugc">https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/626</a>

Polkadot Digest 19 January 2026

root

whitelisted_caller

wish_for_change

staking_admin

treasurer

lease_admin

fellowship_admin

general_admin

auction_admin

referendum_canceller

referendum_killer

small_tipper

big_tipper

small_spender

medium_spender

big_spender

Pilot Proposal: RMTerra "Choose Green" RegenFi - RWA  (Small Spender, ~10k KSM)

Subscan 2025 Q3-Q4 Funding Proposal: Basic service fee for the Kusama Relaychain and Kusama public parachain (AssetHub, Coretime, BridgeHub, People)

ZKAMA - ZK Verifier SDK Proposal {Post-AssetHub Hackathon Curation}

Unlock Winning Strategies with Playzone

Encointer Outlook for Q4'25 and Onwards

Sol-XCM | A typed interface for interoperability from Solidity

Implement a Kusama Forum MVP (Content Pallet v2)

Discovering the Dynamic Features of JLJL99

Implement pallet_content

Milestone-Based Payouts at Scale: Treasury Guardian Tool for Efficient Polkadot Treasury Spending

THE RIGHT TO DISAPPEAR

Deciding

Whitelist #628

- **What's Changing:** The parachain host's lookahead value is increasing from 3 to 5.
- **Why:** This change will make parachain block production more reliable and improve block times.
- **More Info:** You can read the full details in the linked ticket comment.
- **When:** The change is scheduled to take effect at block #31993343, estimated for January 26, 2026, at 09:45:27 UTC.

[Whitelisted Caller] Change config schedulerParams.lookahead to 5

- Kusama is changing how it handles tokens to respond to network activity.
- Instead of setting a fixed limit, it will burn (permanently remove) some tokens.
- The base creation of new tokens is being reduced from 7.82% to 5%.
- Half of all transaction fees will be burned.
- Small percentages of Treasury funds will also be burned regularly.
- These burns aim to lower overall new token creation to about 4.25%, a big decrease.
- This plan works alongside another to reduce network costs.
- The goal is to make Kusama's token economics healthier and more responsive.

 Sustainable KSM Economics via Burn Mechanisms (v1.2)

- Adam is a cybersecurity expert who helps keep the Polkadot and Kusama networks safe.
- He runs two validators, which are like special computers that help the network run smoothly.
- Adam wants to be a registrar on Kusama, which means he would help verify people's identities on the blockchain.
- He built a special website (dotid.app) that makes it easy for people to get their identity verified automatically.
- You can also talk to Adam directly for help if you don't want to use the website.
- He offers his help for free and is known for responding quickly to questions.
- Adam is already helping as a temporary registrar and wants to continue supporting the community.

ECH0.RE Registrar Application

- Bloque is a tool that helps apps use stablecoins easily.
- It lets companies add wallets, payments, and cards with just a little code.
- They want to keep their team working and make their system stronger.
- They also want to support more local money types, like pesos and reals.
- They are asking for $90,000 to do this over six months.
- They already work with several companies in Latin America.
- You can see live data of how people are spending money through their system.

Preparing

Stage 3: Expand, strengthen, and scale Card infrastructure for Kusama.

Delay Demo #2 Treasury Guardian

beneficiary

Kusama

referenda4

fellowship1

treasury16

discussions1385