candidates

members

proficients

fellows

senior_fellows

experts

senior_experts

masters

senior_masters

grand_masters

See https://kusama.subsquare.io/fellowship/referendum/18

Executed

whitelisted_caller

[Whitelisted Caller] Referendum #50 - Upgrade Statemine v9360

This proposal should enable fast-unstake in Kusama, as explained [here](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/path-to-fast-unstake-in-polkadot-kusama/1539).

Enable conditional fast-unstake service in Kusama

We have accidentally submitted the incorrect Genesis WASM for the Bittensor parathread on Kusama (current genesis wasm is using para id 2096), hence we are looking to update it to para id 2242. 

We appreciate all the help, as this is our first referendum request please let us know if we missed anything.

Cancelled

root

[Root] Referendum #48: Change genesis wasm for Bittensor parathread

The Virto team is proposing to continue building projects for the ecosystem with a focus on making blockchain technology accessible to non-crypto-native users. They have successfully built several projects with funds from the treasuries and Web3 foundation, and have several exciting projects lined up for 2023. These include Summa, a lightweight multi-chain capable node extensible with WebAssembly plugins, and a hardware wallet prototype. They also plan to further develop and improve their existing projects, such as Sube, Scales, Libwallet, and Kreivo. The team consists of 12+ people, including a team lead, software engineers, a devops engineer, an embedded engineer, a designer, a user researcher, an economist, and a content creator. The requested 20,000 KSM will cover a 9-month budget for the team, with a range of $324,000 to $378,000 USD.

Rejected

big_spender

Funding the Virto team

Hello, I'm Claudio and you probably recognise me from the KryptosChain Youtube channel. 
Some of you already know that I've also started a Youtube channel to also help educate the Romanian community on the Polkadot ecosystem.
The channel can be found here with the name [Polkadot Romania](https://www.youtube.com/@polkadotromania)

I started this channel at the end of June 2022 and you can find all the details in the proposal [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/121qMKEzJyioIyWvtDw7aYGuZsW9mfNBXc3Crd6Wf2b0)

The idea is to continue funding it for continuation so that the education can continue for Romanians in their native language.

The asking amount is **1,359.67 KSM** for **83** educational videos & at least **2 Twitter Spaces** per month to help drive more engagement through from other Romanian Crypto communities, which is worth approximately **$33,380** at the current market rate.

As always, if you have any questions or doubts, please feel free to ask in the comment section below. 

Happy New Year 2023 everyone & let's help the Polkadot ecosystem grow, together !

Regards,

Claudio

********************************
**Update !**

This referendum is currently winning and there are 8 days and 13 hours left from the time of writing this before a decision is made. Should this pass, the proposal from this [discussion](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/post/2093) will no longer happen until a later time when funding for both channels will be requested and re-calculated based on the KSM price at the time and the dates would be modified. 

However, that being said, should 46 pass, I will continue to also deliver Polkadot content to my English channel so as to maintain the community up to date, but the quality will not be the same as if funding would be allocated to it due to the inability to pay a video editor and having to do the work myself.
Should referendum 46 not pass, I will then go ahead and launch the proposal from the [discussion](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/post/2093) as a referendum on chain. I hope this is understandable. Thanks as always for your time !

- Claudio has started a new Youtube channel called Polkadot Romania to educate the Romanian community on the Polkadot ecosystem.
- The channel has 83 educational videos and at least 2 Twitter Spaces per month to engage with other Romanian Crypto communities.
- Claudio is asking for 1,359.67 KSM, which is worth approximately $33,380 at the current market rate, to fund the channel for continuation.
- If the referendum passes, the proposal from a previous discussion will no longer happen until a later time when funding for both channels will be requested and re-calculated based on the KSM price at the time and the dates would be modified.
- If referendum 46 does not pass, Claudio will launch the proposal from the discussion as a referendum on chain.

medium_spender

[Medium Spender] - Funding for Video Content for Polkadot Romania

We need Kusama Treasury funding to keep our game running after recent changes in fee calculation.

Who are we? We are Evrloot. The first RPG based on RMRK NFTs that managed to deliver a playable game.

By sending your souls (thats what we call our in game characters) to wallets of ours, you can start missions that can yield
rewards in the form of new NFTs. 

We have minted over 90% of all existing RMRK NFTs on Kusama to date and 99% of them come from rewards that players got from going on missions.

There are approximately 2000 missions started each day. 

With the recent changes in fee calculation by Gavin Wood himself in referendum 254 (https://kusama.polkassembly.io/referendum/254) our game
was forced to shut down almost immediately. With an active playerbase of around 120 players, we had daily minting fees of around
1 KSM. Earning royalties from our NFTs was barely enough to cover those costs. But since fees increased by a factor of 10, we are not able to 
maintain our game anymore.

Since there is no way for us to let the players mint the NFTs for themselves without Smart Contracts or Pallets, we need to do it for them and cover the costs.

We also dont want to charge the players for playing the game. We are not talking about some cents, but multiple dollars per day to play a blockchain game.

To give some perspective on how much it would cost the players if they were to cover:

A player with 2 Souls and an average of 4 Missions/soul/day and two trades would be paying around 2.8$/daily (ca. 1,2$ for missions + 0.80$ for sending souls and resources + 0.80$ for trading)
A player with 10 souls and an average of 8 Missions/soul and five trades around 22$/daily

These costs are too high in our opinion and after a vote in our discord server, the community agrees.

The proposed 333 KSM would last for approximetly 1 month. After that we would need to reapply for funding.

With the advancements in RMRK 3.0 on Smart Contracts we are soon migrating to Moonbeam to hopefully find a even bigger playerbase and further decentralize.

This means the funding would be applied for the period between now and the migration to Moonbeam.

The KSM from the treasury would be used to pay the gas fees required to keep the game running. So its entirety would go back into the system.

Never heard of us? Visit our website under evrloot.com or take a look at our game under game.evrloot.com

Additional comment on concerns from voters posted here for visibility:

Hi Adam,

first of all, happy new years to you and everyone reading this. I hope it will be a great one for everybody.  This will be my last response to this topic. While I like the idea of discussions, this is taking up too much time and space in my mind. It is hindering me on what I actually want to do, which is building and delivering to the people. Building not only benefits our players, but the space and Kusama as a whole and wasting energy on discussions like this will not get us anywhere. I can only repeat it again: This proposal is not a compensation for our efforts of pushing the boundries of Kusama and RMRK, this is simply a proposal to help us bench the costs for a short transition period, where not a single cent goes into our pockets, but everything comes full circle in the ecosystem. I am more than happy to have you in a public twitter space or in a discord call, so reach out if you are willing to do that.  

Anyway, let me go through your claims one by one.

  „I find it haughty to think RMRK is the sole reason for governance activity on Kusama. It certainly helped bring user into the ecosystem but it's not the one thing bringing all users to Kusama.“

  I never said RMRK is the sole reason for governance activity. But I am pretty sure even you will agree, that governance participation will not noticeably increase with even greater advancements of technology on a chain, but rather by people who love products that live on a chain and are passionate about being a part of governing the ecosystem those products live in. Non technical people dont care as much about the tech as we do, they want to enjoy their experiences and be a part of something that feels fun and they can identify with.

  „Let me get this straight, you want Kusama to front the bill for a small minority of token holders to continue farming rewards from your game until you can migrate your whole userbase away from Kusama and onto Moonbeam? Why should KSM holders vote to fund anything with an explicit plan to abandon the chain?“  

The game is on Kusama, the players are on Kusama. The fees are paid on the Kusama chain. I am not sure what your point is here. Would your opinion change if we had 1000 players? Would that player base be big enough to rationalize it for you? This gives me real - being rude to the waiter but extra friendly when the restaurant owner comes to the table - vibes, maybe thats just me though. Like you already said, we are migrating because our operations turned out to be unsustainable over night, and we are migrating. Make of that what you want. We love the dotsama space and the tech behind it. We could probably go to Ethereum and earn a multiple of revenue than we are doing right now, because we are actually delivering something. But we love the ecosystem and the people here and at least for me Kusama and Polkadot is one big family

  „You are quite literally asking for funding. All because you're using the funds in a certain way doesn't mean you're not asking for funding.“

  I could have worded that better. What I meant was that we are not asking for funding of our project and the time cost that is involved in that. We are not asking for thousands of development hours being compensated with 100+$ each. And trust me, there are thousands of hours put into Evrloot.

  „While I agree the fee change was jarring and was sort of a "rider bill" on Referendum 14, it certainly wasn't something that came with only 3 hours notice - very misleading. Referendum 14 was submitted at block #15,657,166 and was approved at block #15,680,413 for a total time of 41 hours. If you're going with the first publication of the fee change, Gavin merged the change on December 4th 10:51am UTC, nearly 5 days before it was enacted on-chain. Also, if you remember in ~Q2 of 2021, the fees were reduced 10x when KSM was worth 10 times its current price. To say you weren't expecting this fee to return to its original amount after KSM lost 10x its value is, with all due respect, simply naïve. It was written on the walls.“  

I agree that we could go through each and every proposal that gets published and probably even follow Gavins commits on github and try to understand every line he writes. But in practice, this is not what we do. One the one hand because there are only 24 hours in a day and every person in our team is working a full time job „on the side“. On the other hand I dont feel like this should be our responsibility. Isnt this what the whole Parachain thought is about? Having something you can trust on, build on top and dont have to waste pressure time on. I am personally relatively new to this space and did not expect the fees to 10x, maybe I should have, looking out for stuff like this in the future. We are trying really hard to be as up to date in this space as we can, but it feels overwhelming even for us.  Your argument that there would have been anything we could have moved in this proposal is just as naïve as our thought that a test chain is there to allow people to test stuff and not constantly worry about running out of KSM to pay gas fees.  

„Claim: Evrloot has minted 90% of all existing RMRK NFTs
Truth: This figure is actually ~35%, yet unique holders of Evrloot NFTs only make up ~1.44% of all unique RMRK NFT holders.“  This was admittedly a wrong stat. What I had in mind is a statistic we tweeted about a few weeks ago:

[twitter post]( https://twitter.com/EVRL00T/status/1578715277940097024/photo/1  
)
Where we were minting close to 90% of all NFTs. But thats obviously just a 7D capture and not all time. Maybe I should have focused more on the utility we are offering, total minted NFTs is a stupid stat to go for anywhere, anybody can do that with minimal experience in javascript and enough KSM. What matters is what your NFT can do, which is our strong suit. Sorry for that.

Now lets get to the provable wrong statements of yours.

  „Claim: Active userbase of 120 users
Truth: Since block #15,000,000, 67 wallets were responsible for 90% of all non-team Evrloot SEND interactions“

  I love that you took the time to analyze this and even printed out the list of all users that sent evrloot NFTs, because its even more than I thought. So we had 196 non-evrloot-wallet senders since block #15000000 . Every game EVER has a small amount of players put in the most amount of time and effort and the rest of the playerbase gradually investing less and less time compared to those. Obviously it wont be any different for us. Lets say 60% of those wallets, that sent evrloot NFTs, are actually players (why would they not, they can use their NFTs and get more for basically free by playing our game -> UTILITY), thats pretty much exactly 120 players. What I based my number on is unique wallets starting missions through our frontend on a daily basis. I am pretty sure most game studios go with users per month on this important stat, but we went with unique active DAILY wallets. And now we even have the blockchain data to prove it.  

„Claim: Users with 10 souls spend $22 per day
Truth: There are only 4 wallets spending this much per day with a high cost estimate per SEND interaction and absolutely no wallets spending this much with low cost estimate per SEND interaction„

  There is a fundamental aspect wrong here (READ THE PROPOSAL):  

I never said a player with 10 souls is spending 22$ per day. It says „If the players were to cover“! We are paying for all Minting fees related to our games, plus sending back the souls of the players back after the mission finished. Thats why we had to stop the game, we couldnt pay for these fees anymore. This is not about the send remarks players are creating. But since you did the calculation: Its insane that 4 wallets are already paying over 22$ per day ONLY for sending. This is about covering the minting costs and send remarks that are created on our side! A send remark is one of the cheapest remarks you can create on Kusama because of its relatively small size. What we are doing is minting NFTs for them based on the results of a mission. Minting one of our Fish for example (our most popular collection) takes not only 2 completely separate extrinsics, because of the way remark minting works, but its also approx. 14 times its size -> MINT (almost the same as send) - 3 RESADDS (one resource for a nice thumb on singular, one for our game, one to be equippable -> every single one being 4 times the size of a send) - SEND of the NFT to the player. Minting a fish costs us around 20 cents. And we dont have NFTs with 60 resources, like the abomination of NFTs you created, Adam.  

„Claim: Users think these fees are too expensive and are unwilling to pay them
Truth: Current holders of Evrloot NFTs have endured a total net loss of 958 KSM on Evrloot NFTs so far. Clearly, users have no issue spending KSM on Evrloot. You also hosted a poll in your discord which does not verify Evrloot NFT ownership, so we have no way of knowing if your poll is actually the will of Evrloot NFT holders.“

What is this statistic supposed to mean? We had an initial sale volume of around 3k KSM in total from our very first collection, the Book of Lore and our Souls. So per your definition that would be a 3k KSM total net loss for Evrloot players? Following this definition, players actually were able to recuperate over 2k KSM by new players joining in and them being willing to pay rising floor prices because the demand rose and the utility we offer.  If this is your actual definition and viewpoint I actually find it really sad how you view this whole space. While paying for a dinoxdino egg was, in my opinion, quite the net loss, I dont think purchasing a soul of ours is. You actually get something. You get utility, an ingame on chain marketplace, a merchant that offers trades to you on a daily basis, new content at least once a month. You dont get empty promises and month of not hearing anything. 
For the discord poll: Nice try in getting us to use your rmrk dao site again, but no thanks :) 

  Regarding Moonbeam and your opinion of them needing to help us cover this difficult period:  

The amount of support and help from a technical, business and personal perspective from their Moonbeam council and Derek himself, is already a multitude higher than anything we experienced here.  

Addressing Paradox, because I want to comment on two of his/her concerns:  

Hi Paradox,  

„The proposal is not well presented and on the surface it just seems to be adapted to gain the maximum allowance of the track. Dare I say that Adam presented a better counter with his responses.“  

Not sure what you mean with Adams counter. Having the Moonbeam foundation cover? They will say the exact same thing Adam is saying right now: „The game is not on our chain and neither is the current gameplay“. Where we are though, is Kusama. We are not milking Kusama for anything. We want to provide something for the users of the chain and thats the chain we are asking to cover those expenses.  

„I agree with the position that the relay-chain should not be conflicted with non-essential activities, likes games. It is primarily designed for chain security and fees should be adapted in adherence to this principle.“

  While I understand this position I hope you can understand ours as well. We loved RMRK and what they were building and wanted to create something ourselves. While their advancements to EVMs and Pallets and thus Polkadot are finally happening, back in March, Kusama was the only way to start building with RMRK. We were RMRK first from the beginning and still are, so this limitation effectively hindered us at starting this anywhere else. We could have obviously waited a year more for the dependencies to be ready, but thats not how we operate and thats never going to be how we operate. We want to build cool stuff, do it as fast and good as possible. If that means Kusama, we will be on Kusama, if that means Moonbeam, we will be on Moonbeam. We would much rather deliver something at 80% perfection and create cool experiences for everyone involved, than to crawl towards the unachievable 100% and waste precious time and resources.

  „Should the relay-chain treasury pay for a project that adopted a poor business model? I think this proposal is best suited for the destination SC chain in this case Moonbeam.“  

This was never really about the business model. While we do have multiple approaches to earn revenue from cosmetics, the marketplace, potential new souls when the playerbase grows, we first need to focus on delivering a pleasant experience. Selling eggs and letting buyers wait for a year before anything happens is horrible in my opinion, but is the business model of 90% of other collections in this space. Regarding Moonbeam -> I addressed this earlier.

Evrloot is a game that allows players to send their in-game characters on missions to earn rewards in the form of new NFTs. They have minted over 90% of all existing RMRK NFTs on Kusama to date. The recent changes in fee calculation by Gavin Wood in referendum 254 forced the game to shut down almost immediately. They need Kusama Treasury funding to keep their game running. They proposed 333 KSM to last for approximately one month. The KSM from the treasury would be used to pay the gas fees required to keep the game running. They plan to migrate to Moonbeam soon.

small_spender

Keep Evrloot running for the players after recent gas calculation changes

Hello, it's me Claudio again, 

I'd like to please request a total of **24 KSM** (approx **$605.76** for the current KSM price of **$25.24**) in tips for the following 3 videos which I have produced and haven't been paid by WagMedia due to being out of funds after I already spent the research time and effort to create the videos.

One of the videos is dubbed by one of the ladies I work with for the Spanish material and 2 are original.

**1.** [Polkadot vs Cosmos (comparison video)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X10U4P_WABs&ab_channel=WagMediaenEspa%C3%B1ol)

**2.** [Subwallet tutorial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIMKRdykrDI&ab_channel=WagMediaenEspa%C3%B1ol) 

**3.** [Mangata X Tutorial](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsa-iyZEupo&ab_channel=WagMediaenEspa%C3%B1ol) (dubbed tutorial)

Also for transparency, feel free to check the description of each of these videos to find that this beneficiary address matches with the one in the description.

Thanks in advance,

Claudio



- Claudio made 3 videos about cryptocurrency and wants to be paid for his work.
- He is requesting 24 KSM, which is worth around $605.76.
- One of the videos is in Spanish and was dubbed by one of Claudio's colleagues.
- The videos are about Polkadot vs Cosmos, a Subwallet tutorial, and a Mangata X tutorial.
- Claudio's wallet address is provided in the video descriptions for transparency.

big_tipper

[Big Tipper] - Tip request for videos in Spanish

After the succesful enactment of Ref39 (scheduling one auction with OpenGov to replace the ones not dispatching successfully), this proposal aims to schedule 4 new auctions (1 lost with the migration and the 2 left for LP27). After these, a new schedule for the 2023 will come along for the community to vote on! Note this proposal is submitted as a referendum in OpenGov, under Whitelisted Caller track: meaning that the Kusama community will need to approve and the Fellowship will need to whitelist the proposal hash of this call to enact (the Fellowship is at the moment voting on this proposal to whitelist the hash).

Make sure to vote at your convenience! You can find the specifics of this release in the release notes, if you have any questions make sure to ask!

Proposal hash: `0x85928b2b75ffadbfbd4e321f46183cb33f5a3b68baaca0ebf62d4695a01d0070`

Can be verified [here](https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fkusama-rpc.polkadot.io#/extrinsics/decode/0x15002b0d0285928b2b75ffadbfbd4e321f46183cb33f5a3b68baaca0ebf62d4695a01d00706f000000010a000000).


![](https://i.ibb.co/rx93gJQ/Screenshot-2022-12-23-at-15-46-18.png)




- The proposal suggests scheduling 4 new auctions for Kusama.
- This proposal is submitted as a referendum in OpenGov, and the Kusama community needs to approve it.
- The Fellowship is currently voting on this proposal to whitelist the hash.
- The proposal hash can be verified using the given link.
- The specifics of this release can be found in the release notes, and if anyone has questions, they can ask.

Proposal replacing the last 4 auctions on Kusama (until LP27) due to them failing on dispatch queue.

This proposal aims upgrade Kusama to [v9360](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/releases/tag/v0.9.36): the specific details on this upgrade please check the release notes. This release contains the changes from `v0.9.35` to `v0.9.36`.

Proposal hash `setCode`: `0x94cc7b53299b863908d1458dd44c77aac55fbfbdd4103be5f3fcf5438f613c20`

**Runtime**

- [S] ✅ trivial [#12889](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12889) Low - Staking: store last `min-active-bond` on-chain
- [S] ✅ audited [#12582](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12582) Low - Automatic `withdraw_unbonded` upon `unbond`
- [S] ✅ trivial [#12894](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12894) Low - Warn on missing `pallet::call_index`

**Misc**

- [S] ✅ trivial [#12875](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12875) Low - Use log_target in consensus related crates
- [S] ✅ trivial [#12889](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12889) Low - Staking: store last `min-active-bond` on-chain
- [S] ⏳ pending non-critical audit [#12537](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12537) Low - Try-runtime revamp and facelift
- [S] ✅ audited [#12582](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12582) Low - Automatic `withdraw_unbonded` upon `unbond`
- [P] ✅ trivial [#6440](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/pull/6440) ‼️ HIGH - Fix wrong rate limit + add a few logs.
- [S] ✅ trivial [#12894](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate/pull/12894) Low - Warn on missing `pallet::call_index`
- [P] ✅ trivial [#6450](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/pull/6450) Low - Update weights (0.9.36)


Please note this proposal is submitted as a referendum in OpenGov, under Whitelisted Caller track: meaning that the Kusama community will need to approve, and the Fellowship will need to whitelist the proposal hash of this call to enact. 

Make sure to vote at your convenience!

Here's a summary of the SubSquare post:

- Kusama is getting an upgrade to v9360.
- This upgrade includes changes from v0.9.35 to v0.9.36.
- The proposal includes changes to the runtime and miscellaneous areas.
- The proposal hash is setCode: 0x94cc7b53299b863908d1458dd44c77aac55fbfbdd4103be5f3fcf5438f613c20.
- The proposal needs approval from the Kusama community and the Fellowship to be enacted.

Runtime Release v9360 for Kusama

A while back I started preparing a proposal for writing 3 articles within the broader topic of privacy preserving legal transformation in Polkadot. You can find the previous proposal [here](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/post/1505). I had sought feedback via the Kusama Direction channel back then and the topic of Power of Attorney (PoA) was a clear favorite. Therefore, I have now decided to pursue that topic specifically.

To reinforce that, I got feedback from the community members that as a first step to win the community's trust and prove added value, it might be better to focus on a smaller funding amount and as such limit the proposal to just one article. That's exactly my plan now.

Finally, I've been told that by limiting the scope of research to the Swiss law only, the impact for the community might be reduced. As such, I've decided to expand the scope and focus on building a general legal framework to regulate on-chain PoA. The authorities (especially in Europe) will face the same types of challenges when dealing with digitising the legal system and I aim to provide a framework and guidelines for addressing these issues from first principles (both legal and technological). In order to ground my research in a practical environment and not just theoretical constructs, I will use the Swiss juridical system to provide examples where appropriate.

You can find the full proposal on [my GitHub](https://github.com/legal-julia/power-of-attorney-on-polkadot). Below is the summary of the topic and as always, feedback is very welcome:

**On-chain Power of Attorney: challenges and promises for a legal system.**
- How is PoA currently enforced in EU & Switzerland, who benefits from it and who can abuse it?
- Private key ?= full access revisited: a need for additional, trusted verification (or else take all my money).
- A partially government-controlled blockchain - pros and cons. Could a parachain be the solution?
- Encrypted 'allow-revoke' mechanism, revealable only to selected parties, by the means of substrate chain and a user-friendly app.

The resulting research article will be submitted to an open-access journal.

Here is a summary of the SubSquare post about "On-chain Power of Attorney" for a second-grade student:

- Someone wants to write an article about how to make sure people's information is private when using a new technology called Polkadot.
- They originally wanted to write three articles, but now they will just write one about something called Power of Attorney (PoA).
- PoA helps people give permission to others to do things for them, but sometimes it can be used in a bad way.
- The person writing the article wants to make sure that PoA is used in a safe and fair way on Polkadot.
- They will use examples from the legal system in Switzerland to help explain how to do this.

On-chain Power of Attorney: case study in the Polkadot ecosystem from a legal perspective.

## 1kv insights - website and analysis

Validators are the core of NPOS networks like Polkadot and Kusama. In order to avoid concentrated risk with few validators, it is important that the set of validators is sufficiently diverse and decentralized. The Thousands Validators Programme (1kv programme) encourages decentralization of the validators by giving a platform to individuals that want to start running a validator. 

- This proposal will **build dashboards with the historical performance and statistics of the 1kv validators**. This unique and detailed insight is important for independent nominators and staking pool operators that are deciding to stake with a 1kv validator.

- With all the data collected, the proposal intends **to answer fundamental questions about the 1kv programme**; for example, is the network more decentralized, does it fulfil its promise for long-term participants to become independent, ... Optimizing the 1kv programme will benefit the whole network.

- Lastly, we intend to **document the inner workings of the 1kv scoring mechanism**. This will allow operators to better align themselves towards the priorities that 1kv wants to incentivize.

![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MathCryptoDoc/dotsama-snippets/main/1kv-insight-proposal/alpha-site.png)

Since the last month, we have made available an [alpha version of the proposed 1kv insight page](https://insights.math-crypto.com/). It is functional but with only a few metrics. It has 20 to 30 unique visitors *daily*.

For more details including costs, see our full proposal [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mv0GbmkmtOz132C3C1byOK4PVjXxlB4MUak0YYQAaWs).

The proposal has been up for discussion [here](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/post/1953) since 10 Nov 2022. Community feedback was incorporated.

Requested funding: USD 39'923 or KSM 1'533 based on EMA7 at the time of submission.

1kv Insights is a program that encourages decentralization of validators in NPOS networks like Polkadot and Kusama. The program gives a platform to individuals that want to start running a validator. 

The proposal aims to build dashboards with historical performance and statistics of the 1kv validators. This will help independent nominators and staking pool operators decide which validator to stake with. 

The proposal also intends to answer fundamental questions about the 1kv program, such as whether the network is more decentralized and whether it fulfills its promise for long-term participants to become independent. 

The inner workings of the 1kv scoring mechanism will be documented, allowing operators to better align themselves with the priorities that 1kv wants to incentivize. 

An alpha version of the proposed 1kv insight page is available, but it only has a few metrics. The proposal has been up for discussion since November 10, 2022, and the requested funding is USD 39,923 or KSM 1,533 based on EMA7 at the time of submission.

[Medium Spender] 1kv insights - website and analysis

Start a new parachain lease auction immediately.

auction_admin

[Auction Admin] Referendum #39

Hello everyone,

It's me Claudio ([KryptosChain](https://www.youtube.com/c/kryptoschain)) again & this time I would like to submit the following proposal for funding of 45 Educational Videos about Polkadot, Kusama and the ecosystem consisting of the parachains, 3rd party wallets such as Nova, Talisman and Subwallet. All the details can be found in the proposal which can be found [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/19N1cX_KhyXhSwF4RhphNsPHRIk1tooEMYoosWc5lpRc).

The asking amount is **331.27** KSM which is worth approximately **$8,325** which should fund me for approximately 2 months of content.

I would appreciate your support in helping me continue the promotion of the Polkadot ecosystem.

Also, feel free to comment if you have any sort of questions, I'll be more than happy to answer them.

Thanks in advance,

Claudio (KryptosChain)

- Claudio wants to make 45 educational videos about Polkadot, Kusama, and their ecosystem.
- He needs $8,325 to fund his project for 2 months.
- Claudio has a proposal that explains all the details of his project.
- He is asking for support to promote the Polkadot ecosystem.
- If you have any questions, you can ask Claudio.

[Small Spender] - Funding for Educational Content about Dotsama

Mistake in KSM input, please reject this proposal, the correct proposal is 38. Thanks and sorry about this.

IMPORTANT ***Mistake in KSM input, please reject this proposal***

Originally posted [here](https://kusama.subsquare.io/treasury/proposal/231).

Hello Kusama community,

This proposal is for a retroactive grant of my two open source, free tools. One for selecting the best validators and another for gathering staking income in a spreadsheet. You can try the validator selector [here](https://james-sangalli.github.io/dot-validator-selector/) and the staking income spreadsheet generator [here](https://james-sangalli.github.io/dot-staking-income-web/).

I originally set out to create these tools because I was struggling with staking. Selecting the best validators and tracking your staking income were unsolved issues at the time and they are still causing confusion for many. Therefore, I decided to solve my own problems and the problems of others by creating simple, easy to use tools that would get the job done. 

You can read the full proposal [here](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YT2qssdH12AtWFRloRnBanK6H1sGuE6EaX782d4qK40/edit?usp=sharing).

Thank you for taking the time to consider this proposal!

- A person has made two free tools to help with staking on Kusama.
- The tools help with selecting the best validators and tracking staking income.
- The person made the tools because they were having trouble with staking and wanted to help others.
- The tools are easy to use and can help solve problems for people.
- The person is asking for a grant to support their work on these tools.

Polkadot/Kusama staking tools proposal

**Proposal Summary**

On behalf of the community and ecosystem, we propose the creation of the **Infrastructure Builders Program** that will work to create a decentralized network of infrastructure services providers working as an autonomous organization to provide mission critical services. With recent issues in the crypto space regarding centralization around single providers for core network services; it is critical that the ecosystem work to decentralize all aspects of operations. By putting too much trust in any one entity we put the entire network at risk. We believe this program will work toward the goal of creating a more trustless environment with better collective oversight of network infrastructure and a high quality of service. 

**Service Details**

Existing members of the 1000 validators program will be able to apply to this program after having achieved the necessary rankings set forth in the proposal. Accepted applicants will deploy owned server hardware in enterprise datacenter environments to provide necessary bootnodes, rpc services, snapshots, and other critical infrastructure services. These services are expected to be 100% powered by renewable energy or 100% offset by other carbon reduction strategies. Members will be paid in an Infrastructure-as-a-Service format for the various nodes they run and operate decentralized health checks for all other members as well as other aspects of network infrastructure. 

We have already begun deploying and have a limited proof of concept as outlined in Program Milestone 1.  Stake Plus has teamed with 3 other 1000 validators program members located in the US, Turkey, Czech Republic, and Portugal. We are currently providing support for Westend, Kusama and Polkadot and are currently working to bring up services for Westmint, Statemine, Statemint, Encointer and Collectives. Existing services are deployed at the following locations:


- wss://rpc.dotters.network/polkadot
- wss://rpc.dotters.network/kusama
- wss://rpc.dotters.network/westend


**Funding Details**

We are requesting $1,300,000 for funding of the program milestone 2. The funds will be held in an Administrative Curator controlled 3 of 5 multi-sig wallet. The expected utilization of these funds is broken down as follows:


- Member One-Time Payments: $300,000 
- Member RPC Service Payments: $500,000 
- Member Snapshot Payments: $100,000
- Member Services/Monitoring Infrastructure: $75,000
- Janitorial Advisors Payments: $45,000
- Administrative Curator payments: $26,000
- Software Development Fund: $254,000


You can view the full **Infrastructure Builders Program** proposal here:

[https://docs.google.com/document/d/16USQYVhlyAlrU829EUB2TRoqUC0nnfoS_uCdZ84HT8k/edit?usp=sharing](https://docs.google.com/document/d/16USQYVhlyAlrU829EUB2TRoqUC0nnfoS_uCdZ84HT8k/edit?usp=sharing)






- A group of people want to create a program called the Infrastructure Builders Program.
- This program will help make sure that important parts of the internet are not controlled by just one person or group.
- People who are already part of a group called the 1000 validators program can apply to be part of this new program.
- The people who are accepted will use their own computer servers to provide important services for the internet.
- They are asking for $1,300,000 to help pay for this program.

treasurer

[Treasurer] Referendum #35

This is a resubmission of our runtime upgrade which has been whitelisted by fellowship already.
The resubmission is necessary because of several reasons:
1. [referendum 9](https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/referendum/9) would have enacted after 15M blocks instead of instantly
2. our joint [referendum 17](https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/referendum/17) with Statemine has been executed, but during that time, Encointer was no parachain because of:
3. [referendum 243](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/referendum/243) passed, but failed to execute due to transition to gov2. This was fixed in [referendum 25](https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/referendum/25)

So, now we are finally ready to execute our runtime upgrade with the help of the community voting in favor of this referendum.

## runtime upgrade v12

Encointer has a new code upgrade which
* allows participants to unregister from ceremony cycles. This will help us decrease noshows and increase security by doing so
* allows reputables to endorse newbies. This is a massive improvement for growth. Before, only bootstrappers could endorse a one-off amount of newbies. Now, everybody that has recently proven their personhood can endorse a small number (~2-5, TBD) of newbies with every cycle. This is very much in line with the "word of mouth" growth strategy 
* upgrades our dependencies to polkadot-0.9.28

Detailed changes to our [runtime](https://github.com/encointer/encointer-parachain/compare/1.2.0...1.3.2) and to our [pallets](https://github.com/encointer/pallets/compare/1.2.0...1.3.2)


[runtime release v12 in our GH repository](https://github.com/encointer/encointer-parachain/releases/tag/1.3.2)

## The call to be executed on the Encointer parachain with root privilege

[authorizeUpgrade call on Encointer](https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fkusama.api.encointer.org#/extrinsics/decode/0x0102ccdfc804e0482f951ef7ad15fda0d38ead81c42e93a8276e60a45c663b8a3b91
)

## the proposal

[proposal call xcmPallet.send to be executed on Kusama](https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fkusama.api.onfinality.io%2Fpublic-ws#/extrinsics/decode/0x630001000100a50f0204060202286bee880102ccdfc804e0482f951ef7ad15fda0d38ead81c42e93a8276e60a45c663b8a3b91
) yields hash `0x7776194086d1496a812cb61670080157d2f511cbcbaafddd44ff248a753788e7`

## whitelisting by fellowship

Has already passed and call `0x7776194086d1496a812cb61670080157d2f511cbcbaafddd44ff248a753788e7` has been whitelisted

## public referendum

propose to dispatch the whitelisted call

[dispatchProposal](https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fkusama.api.onfinality.io%2Fpublic-ws#/extrinsics/decode/0x2c03630001000100a50f0204060202286bee880102ccdfc804e0482f951ef7ad15fda0d38ead81c42e93a8276e60a45c663b8a3b91) encodes to `0x2c03630001000100a50f0204060202286bee880102ccdfc804e0482f951ef7ad15fda0d38ead81c42e93a8276e60a45c663b8a3b91`

[note preimageD](https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fkusama.api.onfinality.io%2Fpublic-ws#/extrinsics/decode/0x2000d42c03630001000100a50f0204060202286bee880102ccdfc804e0482f951ef7ad15fda0d38ead81c42e93a8276e60a45c663b8a3b91)

hash = `0xd394967583efb9b8fe1dd4ad84d3bcb7c5382cae19319b2cfc1682e227ce76d3` len = 53

[publicReferendum submission](https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fkusama.api.onfinality.io%2Fpublic-ws#/extrinsics/decode/0x15002b0d02d394967583efb9b8fe1dd4ad84d3bcb7c5382cae19319b2cfc1682e227ce76d3350000000164000000) 

which started this referendum


Encointer is a platform that has a new code upgrade called runtime upgrade v12. 
This upgrade has three new features that will help increase security and growth.
The upgrade also upgrades dependencies to polkadot-0.9.28.
The community has to vote in favor of this referendum to execute the runtime upgrade.
The proposal has already been whitelisted by fellowship and is now ready for public referendum.

Encointer runtime upgrade v12 2nd try

Hello, I would like to request a tip of 6 KSM for the production of 2 Youtube videos containing Parachain news + 1.3 KSM as a refund for creating the wrong preimage in this proposal and losing that KSM: https://kusama.polkassembly.io/referenda/32

**Note:** The public address linked to this referendum has also been added to the description of both videos for transparency that it's really me who's requesting it.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR_iRg1kovE&feature=youtu.be

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUBWRAsqS5U&feature=youtu.be

Thanks in advance.

Claudio (KryptosChain)

1. Claudio, who goes by the name KryptosChain, is requesting a tip of 6 KSM and a refund of 1.3 KSM.
2. He is requesting the tip for creating two YouTube videos that contain Parachain news.
3. Claudio has also added his public address to the description of both videos for transparency.
4. The refund is for creating the wrong preimage in a proposal and losing 1.3 KSM.
5. Claudio has provided links to both YouTube videos in his request.

small_tipper

[Small Tipper] - Request tip for production of 2 videos

Hello, I would like to request a tip of 6 KSM for the production of 2 Youtube videos containing Parachain news.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jR_iRg1kovE&feature=youtu.be

2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUBWRAsqS5U&feature=youtu.be

Thanks in advance.

Claudio (KryptosChain)

Mistake in preimage - Please don't support it [Small Tipper] - Request tip for production of 2 videos 

To put some order in the Chaos after the launch of OpenGov, derek of Metaspan has made a dashboard for checking votes and delegations of the 1kv validators. This is very useful since otherwise validators need to check their votes using cumbersome extrinsics or check one-by-one on Subsquare / Polkassembly.

The dashboard is accessible [here](https://metaspan.io/kusama/candidate) after you select a validator and go to the Referenda tab.

![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MathCryptoDoc/dotsama-snippets/main/referenda/figures/metaspan_referenda-dash.png)

We propose a tip of 8 KSM (about 200 USD at the time of submission) for the current version of this dashboard.

**This referendum is a correction of Referendum 30 where the incorrect tip amount was configured**

Here are 5 bullet points summarizing the SubSquare post content:

- A dashboard has been created by Derek of Metaspan to check votes and delegations of 1kv validators.
- The dashboard is very useful for validators as they can check their votes easily without using cumbersome extrinsics or checking one-by-one on Subsquare / Polkassembly.
- The dashboard can be accessed by selecting a validator and going to the Referenda tab.
- The post proposes a tip of 8 KSM (about 200 USD at the time of submission) for the current version of this dashboard.
- This referendum is a correction of Referendum 30 where the incorrect tip amount was configured.

[Small Tipper] OpenGov referenda dashboard for 1kv validators - correct amount

**Amount of the tip was entered incorrectly as the astronomically small amount of 0.000000000008 KSM. Please vote for referendum 31 instead!**

To put some order in the Chaos after the launch of OpenGov, derek of Metaspan has made a dashboard for checking votes and delegations of the 1kv validators. This is very useful since otherwise validators need to check their votes using cumbersome extrinsics or check one-by-one on Subsquare / Polkassembly.

The dashboard is accessible [here](https://metaspan.io/kusama/candidate) after you select a validator and go to the Referenda tab.

![](https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MathCryptoDoc/dotsama-snippets/main/referenda/figures/metaspan_referenda-dash.png)

We propose a tip of 8 KSM (about 200 USD at the time of submission) for the current version of this dashboard.

Here's a summary of the SubSquare post:

- There is a new dashboard created by Derek of Metaspan for checking votes and delegations of validators on OpenGov.
- The dashboard is very useful for validators as it saves them time and effort.
- The dashboard can be accessed by selecting a validator and going to the Referenda tab.
- The post proposes a tip of 8 KSM (about 200 USD) for the current version of the dashboard.
- The post also suggests voting for Referendum 31 instead of entering an astronomically small tip amount of 0.000000000008 KSM.

[Small Tipper] OpenGov referenda dashboard for 1kv validators - wrong amount

Hello everyone! This referenda has been opened as a substitute for [Referenda 10](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/referenda/10)

 With this post, we are requesting a top-up to the Moderation Team Bounty to continue funding their contributions and support to our community.

 Due to the current market conditions, we are requesting this top-up earlier than we expected.

 In addition, somes changes have been made to the initial proposal.

 All of these changes and the details of the proposal, along with spending analysis, can be found [HERE](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aFniLjcaNHc4ehJyIy0zQbWJJsEHqWuCRxX0szggPxk)

 Original Bounty Top-up Post can be found [HERE](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/bounty/14#a22a560c-fc0d-4d3c-8ff3-5890e08b79af) 

 Thank you for your attention!

- A new referenda has been opened to request a top-up for the Moderation Team Bounty.
- The top-up is needed earlier than expected due to current market conditions.
- Changes have been made to the initial proposal.
- Details of the proposal and spending analysis can be found in a Google document.
- The original Bounty Top-up Post can be found on a website called Polkassembly.

Big Spender Proposal: Moderation Team Bounty Top-up

This on-chain proposal is for Project Gweihir. [**All details of the project can be found here**](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zcD9WJbxp5wqw3rTYHmJHjGBSqytFmnBUeY0RvC-2Rg/edit?usp=sharing). In short, we would like to build an open-source Chainlink external adapter for Kusama chaindata and a proof-of-concept dApp. This infrastructure will allow smart contracts on Ethereum to use Kusama chaindata.

Previous discussion and context [**can be found here**](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/post/2028).

We are asking for ~2,811 KSM = ~$83,000 using EMA14 on Kraken. We came to this number by taking the weighted average price of all KSM-USD trades on Kraken from December 1st, 2022 at 18:00 UTC to December 15th, 2022 at 18:00 UTC (13,274 data points).  That came out to a KSM price of ~$29.73 USD. This EMA14 figure can be verified using [**Kraken's API**](https://api.kraken.com/0/public/Trades?pair=KSMUSD&since=1669917600000000000).

We chose enactment at block #16000000 to put this in the tax year of 2023.

Thanks for all the support and feedback!

Adam Steeber
CTO - Steeber Solutions LLC

p.s. though some UIs say that medium spender can only spend up to 500 KSM, this figure was increased to 3,333 KSM in v0934 [**when the `QUID` unit increased by 10x**](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot/blob/release-v0.9.34/runtime/kusama/constants/src/lib.rs#L29).

SubSquare is proposing to build an open-source Chainlink external adapter for Kusama chaindata and a proof-of-concept dApp. This will allow smart contracts on Ethereum to use Kusama chaindata. They are asking for around 2,811 KSM, which is about $83,000, and they arrived at this number by taking the weighted average price of all KSM-USD trades on Kraken from December 1st, 2022 at 18:00 UTC to December 15th, 2022 at 18:00 UTC. They chose to enact this proposal at block #16000000 to put it in the tax year of 2023. The proposal was made by Adam Steeber, who is the CTO of Steeber Solutions LLC. The medium spender limit was increased to 3,333 KSM in v0934.

Project Gweihir, a Chainlink external adapter for Kusama chain data.

Hello everyone, I am Hitesh from Describedot. We create educational videos and weekly updates around the Dotsama ecosystem. We started this channel about a year ago and we have already published 34 videos on our youtube channel. Our weekly viewing growth had been over 28 percent which led us to approximately 30,000 views in a year. Recently we’ve also received great support from the Council Members of Polkadot and Kusama through tip endorsements. We are really thankful to the community members who supported us and assisted us in making great content.

Just last year we learned that people want to know about governance, about networks but they don’t have any resources to walk them through it. We decided to create basic videos during our early days and this has helped users to explore the Polkadot stack. They expressed their gratitude through likes and comments on our videos. Our main focus is to teach the Polkadot stack as well as governance in layman's terms to the Hindi audience.

Our first milestone was covered by WagMedia but we are looking to continue the work with a spending proposal.

You can learn more about our proposal from the document. Let the community know if you have any questions. We are happy to answer them

[Describedot](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vnweYrk-ooQqfbha_EJUy9qYx3KDN3mk6PZVM7k0UPM)

- Describedot creates educational videos about the Polkadot stack and governance.
- They have published 34 videos on their YouTube channel in the past year.
- Their videos have helped users explore the Polkadot stack and understand governance in layman's terms.
- They focus on teaching the Hindi audience.
- They have received support from the Council Members of Polkadot and Kusama through tip endorsements.

Describedot Proposal: Production of 45 Dotsama ecosystem tutorial videos

Replacement of [Referendum #11](https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/referendum/11)

The substrate-api-client is a Rust-library for connecting to a substrate-based node via RPC. It is an alternative to subxt, which provides a similar functionality. RPC clients are needed in any software component, connecting to a substrate parachain. Therefore it is advisable, that there is more than one client available for Rust developers. Apart from that, the substrate-api-client fills a gap, providing the possibility to create extrinsics in a no_std-environment. Thereby facilitating extrinsic creation from within trusted hardware (like Intel sgx). This has a big potential for further usage in IoT environments. Last but not least, the substrate-api-client has an easy-to-use interface and comes with many practical examples, which makes it a good option for new developers.

This proposal aims to fund:

1. maintenance and support for the substrate api client over 3 months (Nov-22 until Jan-23).

2. evaluation and design of two new features:
     - CLI-wallet implementation
     - full no_std-compatibility

See the [discussion](https://kusama.polkassembly.io/post/1923) and our [full proposal](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hJzzmimz_pjK-_4TunKvs-i2Zot2_9Ob3qUr7BlzaNo/edit?usp=sharing) for the details.


1. Substrate-api-client is a Rust-library for connecting to a substrate-based node via RPC.
2. It is an alternative to subxt and helps in creating extrinsics in a no_std-environment.
3. This has a big potential for further usage in IoT environments.
4. The proposal aims to fund maintenance and support for the substrate api client over 3 months.
5. It also aims to evaluate and design two new features: CLI-wallet implementation and full no_std-compatibility.

OpenGov Referenda