Threshold
Dear Proposer,
Thank you for your proposal. Our second vote on this proposal is NAY.
The Big Spender track requires 60% quorum according to our voting policy. This proposal has received four aye and four nay votes from ten members, with two members abstaining. Below is a summary of our members' comments:
In the recent referendum, voters expressed diverse opinions on a proposed initiative aimed at combating scams. Supporters highlighted its potential benefits, particularly for enhancing security and providing a viable alternative to existing communication tools. However, several voters raised concerns about the project's lack of transparency, advocating for open-source development to ensure security and user trust. Others were skeptical about its overall effectiveness and questioned the necessity of the tool within existing communities. A few voters abstained, seeking more information before making a decision.
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
Thanks so much to everyone who has taken the time to review the proposal and provided feedback. Both the support and criticism has been extremely valuable in shaping the direction of the project. Let me address any concerns that were rasied.
On Open Sourcing the Code:
I completely understand the importance of open source, especially in terms of security, transparency and being a treasury funded project. DotShield was originally closed source during early prototyping to avoid exploits during the initial roll out. However, I will actively work on preparing the codebase for public release, starting with a review by a trusted third party to ensure its security. I will share a public roadmap and timeline for the open-source milestone in the coming weeks.
ON ROI and Treasury use:
I appreciate your stance on community-driven funding. I have spent the past 5 months working full-time on DotShield as a community initiative and actually had had early adopter groups voluntarily utilise DotShield before the proposal.
However, for a broader adoption across the ecosystem, especially under-resourced, start-ups and DAOS, a common-good service funded through the treasury is far more scalable and accessible. Much like Kusamas shared security layer, I believe DotShield can serve as the social security layer for communities. If dDotShield prevents even a few user accounts from being compromised, it will have already paid for itself before the proposal is completed.
We don't want to aim to gate this tool behind pricing tiers, our goal is ecosystem-wide protection.
ON coordination with Anti-scam Team:
I have reached out to the members of the Anti-scam team early on and invited feedback and potential collaboration. While DotSHield is not directly managed by that initiative, it can definitely complement their work by automating enforcement of social community safety.
Thanks again for taking the time to provide feedback as I designed this product specifically for the community and will be basing the milestones and functionality from feedback 🙏
On behalf of Trustless Core DV and as a consequence of the impossibility to issue feedback from that account, the corresponding feedback is presented:
"Dear Dotshield Team,
Thank you for submitting your proposal. We appreciate the dedication and effort behind your project. After careful consideration, Trustless Core has decided Vote NAY. Below are our primary reasons:
1 - Cost and Scope
The estimated budget (930 hours at US$60/hour) is quite substantial when compared to similar initiatives. In addition, the proposal’s broad scope—covering both Telegram and Discord—raises questions about the feasibility of delivering all features within the proposed timeline and budget.
2 - Technical Transparency
While on-chain verification is valuable, we found limited details regarding the bot’s architecture, code openness, and data handling. Greater clarity on security measures and cryptographic safeguards would be essential to bolster trust in the final product.
3 - Existing Solutions and Adoption
Although DotShield offers Polkadot-focused innovation, there are already tools that effectively handle verification and spam prevention for various communities. Adoption of a new on-chain verification bot remains uncertain, particularly if existing solutions are already meeting most needs.
4 - Proof of Efficacy
We acknowledge DotShield’s potential; however, more robust data is needed to demonstrate a sustainable reduction of scams and invasions across diverse community types. Security-focused solutions typically require proven, continuously tested results to justify significant investment.
We respect your vision and your commitment to strengthening security within the Polkadot and Kusama ecosystem. While we cannot offer support at this time, we hope these insights will be helpful as you refine DotShield for future opportunities.
Sincerely,
Trustless Core"
https://x.com/trustlesscore/status/1912960434161791394
GM Spicy,
are you still affiliated with the Soramitsu project?