Treasury / bounty initiative of community follow-up managers

The current treasury governance system in Polkadot suffers from the issue of lack of follow-ups. Proposals are usually intensively discussed during the proposing phrase. However, once the proposal is funded, follow-ups seldom take place. It's usually up to the proposer to update the community on the progress, which, fortunately, many do. However, several instances have also happened that the proposer completely misses the deadlines, or even vanishes, "rug-pulling" the community. As long as the majority of treasury proposals still follow the "pay first, do later" model, we cannot prevent rug-pulling. However, we can create mechanisms of mandatory follow-ups of proposals, so that the community can make more informed decisions of approving / disapproving proposals, especially with OpenGov on the road.


A new bounty program, called the "follow-up bounty", funded by the treasury, is created. The bounty program only concerns "pay first, do later" treasury proposals. Other types of proposals are not covered.

All "pay first, do later" proposals are divided into milestones, where deadlines are shown. The deadlines may be a precise date, a month, or a quarter. In the later two cases, the last day of the month or the quarter is assumed. From the date of the deadline to one week after, the bounty program would call for reviews (CFR) from third-party reviewers ("community follow-up managers"), of the completeness of the current milestone. The review should include, among other things, objective ratings of how well things are going so far. The bounty amount is fixed 5% of the proposal value, divided equally for each milestones.

If less than or equal to 3 reviews are received at the end of the CFR, then the bounty amount is divided equally to all reviewers. If more than 3 reviews are received, then a community vote takes place, whose form is decided by the bounty managers. The bounty amount is then divided equally to top 3 reviewers.

With this, "pay first, do later" proposals should also mark clearly, during the proposal phrase, of this fixed 5% cost for community management and follow-up. In this way, we can hopefully also incentivize more "do first, pay later" proposals, because they will always be 5% cheaper than the former.

Post a new comment