https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1531

- The Polkadot Ecology Research Institute is a big research group in Asia about the Polkadot community.
- They have been working on Polkadot for more than 6 years and have helped many projects and events.
- The team has written nearly 300 pieces about Polkadot and has reached over 63 million readers.
- They support projects in the Polkadot ecosystem, even outside China, often for free.
- Their Twitter account has grown a lot, with over 4,700 followers this year.
- They recently shared a big report about Polkadot's future that got a lot of attention.
- They are asking for money to help pay for their operations and work for another year.

[MS] DOT #1531 - The operating cost for the research organization Polkadot Ecology Research Institute for 2025/4-2026/3

Permanence DAO

**Dear members of Permanence DAO,**

We have announced our **conflict of interest (CoI) policy** following the receipt of our **Decentralized Voices (DV) delegation** on the **27th of March, 2025**. The definition of the policy, [published](https://x.com/PermanenceDAO/status/1905223487976783987) on the Permanence DAO Twitter account, is as follows:

> As part of its conflict of interest policy, Permanence DAO will abstain from using the voting power granted through the DV delegation on any proposal that directly or indirectly benefits any of its members.

> While direct benefit includes the cases where a member is the proponent of a proposal, indirect benefit occurs when a member has a financial affiliation with the proposing organization, has a partnership with a beneficiary, or holds a stakeholder position in a beneficiary.

The policy above was agreed upon by members in an internal poll held on the **Permanence DAO private Telegram channel** on the **16th of March, 2025,** with **7 aye votes**. This proposal aims to **formalize the policy** with the signed votes of the members and to define the **complementary terms** to the policy as follows:

1. Any member who has a **direct or indirect financial or business interest**, as defined by the policy text above, in any Polkadot or Kusama proposal to be voted on by Permanence DAO must **disclose the conflict of interest prior to the on-chain submission** of the proposal.

2. If a member enters **business negotiations** with the proposer during the **on-chain decision or confirmation periods** of a proposal, they must **immediately inform the DAO**, so that the DAO can activate its policy to **protect itself and the DV delegation** from conflicts of interest.

3. Any member with **sufficient evidence** of another member **violating the conflict of interest policy or the additional terms** listed above may **initiate an internal referendum** for the **demotion** of the violating member from **voting member to general member**, effectively removing their voting rights within Permanence DAO. A **simple majority** with **80% participation** shall be required for the decision.

**The rationale behind this proposal is twofold:**

1. To prevent the DV delegation granted by the Web3 Foundation from providing **disproportionate business advantage** to the members of Permanence DAO over the wider community of business actors in Polkadot and Kusama.
2. To prevent DAO members from being **lobbied by a potentially violating member** toward a **biased opinion** on referenda and proposers. 

This proposal does not define a policy for the **critical case** of a member entering into business negotiations with a proposer **after the submission of the first on-chain AYE vote including the DV delegation voting power**. This condition shall be **discussed by the members during the first two weekly calls following the submission** of this internal referendum. Another internal referendum for amendment may be initiated by members where necessary.

**Please vote at your convenience. Members and the wider community are welcome to suggest additions or amendments.**

**Kind regards.**

[INT] PDAO #4 - Formalization and Refinement of the Conflict of Interest Policy

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1533

- A team of 11 people and 7 partners created a proposal for Polkadot.
- They believe that Polkadot needs better ways to manage its public actions.
- Lots of money is spent to promote Polkadot each year, but much of it goes to waste.
- New users often struggle to understand how to interact with Polkadot.
- The proposal combines 7 ideas to make Polkadot better and more efficient.
- It aims to strengthen partnerships with big esports organizations.
- The proposal includes creating new tools and apps to help users.

[T] DOT #1533 - Faze x Vitality - Esport Meta Proposal.

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1526

- Subsquid Lab Official is asking for $310,592.98 to help maintain and develop public SQD Archives.
- Archives provide important access to data for projects in the Polkadot ecosystem.
- Popular projects using these archives include Tanssi Network, Talisman Wallet, and Polimec.
- SQD has moved to a paid model but still offers free access to public chains.
- In Q3 2024, demand for archival data increased significantly, and the infrastructure was improved to handle it.
- The SQD network now has 1,139 active Worker Nodes, securely storing lots of data.
- The proposal is submitted to the Polkadot treasury to cover the costs of running the archives.

[MS] DOT #1526 - SQD (fka Subsquid) - Public Data Indexing Infrastructure for Polkadot and Kusama (Q3 2024)

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1535

PoKe Berlin Team is requesting a 6-month extension to transform promising projects into an operational state and maximize the impact on the Polkadot ecosystem. They have achieved all their milestones so far and secured signed agreements in over 10 industry verticals. Some of the most promising projects include collaboration with a Chinese technology conglomerate, diaspora-financed health insurance for an African country, mandatory travel insurance for an African country, a German Defense Industry Project, projects in the government and private sector for an outer territory of the USA, Central American Ministry for the Environment, Blockchain Use Cases in Supply Chain and CO2 Network, and a Photovoltaic Remote Control Project for German Municipalities. The team will focus on finalizing concepts, developing high-level roadmaps, involving Polkadot ecosystem partners, and offering project management support. The team members have deep roots in the Polkadot ecosystem and have demonstrated excellent skills in business development and key accounting.

[MS] DOT #1535 - 6 Months Extension for the PoKe Berlin Team - Transform Projects to Operational State

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1534

This is a tip created by the [tip-bot](https://github.com/paritytech/substrate-tip-bot/).

### Details

- **Repository:** [polkadot-sdk](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk)
- **PR:** [#3811](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/3811)
- **Contributor:** [dharjeezy](https://github.com/dharjeezy)
- **Tip Size:** medium (80 DOT)


[ST] DOT #1534 - SmallTipper

**Summary**
This proposal recommends transitioning StaFiHub’s validator set to a permissioned model, with a phased reduction over one year. Additionally, it proposes returning the remaining FIS allocated for validator incentives to the StaFi DAO Treasury.

**Abstract**
With the launch of LSaaS, rTokens on StaFiHub are being migrated to Neutron and restructured within the LSaaS framework. Migration plans for all rTokens are already in place, and StaFiHub itself has a clear roadmap toward full migration.

To support this transition, we propose moving the StaFiHub validator set to a permissioned model. This approach will ensure a smooth winding down of remaining rTokens and enable a controlled phase-out of validators. Over the next month, the validator will be operated by the StaFi team. After three months, any unstaked assets will be offboarded, alongside the scheduled discontinuation of FIS staking rewards.

**Problem**
Most rTokens have already migrated from StaFiHub, yet validators continue to operate and receive FIS rewards. This ongoing issuance contributes to unnecessary FIS inflation and sustained sell pressure on the token — despite the network’s diminishing economic activity.

**Rationale**
To accelerate StaFiHub’s migration and reduce FIS emissions, we propose transitioning to a permissioned validator model, operated by the StaFi core team. The total value of rTokens remaining on StaFiHub is approximately $18,000 — a relatively low amount. However, hundreds of thousands of unclaimed FIS rewards remain pending.

Given the small asset base, shifting to a permissioned setup introduces minimal security risk. The core responsibility will be to process remaining user unstaking requests, not to maintain an active or decentralized network.

By returning the unused validator incentives to the DAO Treasury, we reduce unnecessary FIS emissions, ease sell pressure, and support a healthier token economy.

**Conclusion**
We invite feedback and questions from the community. By moving to a permissioned validator model and ending FIS rewards on StaFiHub, we can:
- Facilitate a clean and efficient rToken migration
- Minimize inflationary pressures on FIS
- Return unused funds to the DAO Treasury
- Align with long-term sustainability goals

This change represents a proactive step toward preserving value for FIS holders and closing the StaFiHub chapter responsibly.

**Vote**
For: Support the proposal for transitioning to a permissioned model and discontinuing validator rewards.
Against: Do nothing.

Please read the full proposal [here](https://dao.stafi.io/t/proposal-sunsetting-stafihub-moving-to-a-permissioned-model-and-ending-validator-rewards/237).

Sunsetting StaFiHub - Moving to a Permissioned Model and Ending Validator Rewards

StaFi

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1516

- The Infrastructure Builders Program (IBP) helps support the Polkadot ecosystem.
- It started in 2022 and provides important services like RPC.
- IBP is made up of different independent service providers from around the world.
- The program needs more funding to keep providing these services.
- Funding is paid after the services have been delivered.
- Last year, the cost for their services was about $2.5 million.

[T] DOT #1516 - IBP Bounty Top-Up

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1530

- The Spammening was a special event involving Amforc and Parity Technologies to test how well the Polkadot network can handle many transactions.
- This event included different phases and a big public test that showed strong performance of the Polkadot ecosystem.
- Before the main test, Amforc did other smaller tests on the Polkadot and Kusama networks.
- Amforc worked hard without getting paid during this project and is now asking for 45,000 USDT as a reward for their efforts.
- They helped design the structure of the event, prepared proposals, and coordinated with others to run the tests.
- Some problems were found during the tests, including issues with the network's ability to handle many transactions at the same time.
- The project showed the importance of rewarding those who help improve the Polkadot ecosystem.

[SS] DOT #1530 - The Spammening Reward for Amforc

**Dear Permanence DAO members and community,**

In tandem with our recently refined [CoI Policy](https://voting.opensquare.io/p/502),  following our participation in the **Decentralized Voices (DV)** delegation on the **27th of March, 2025**. we've been working on the formalization of our **voting policy** which has been adopted by the core membership as the guiding framework for all internal votes, treasury proposal evaluations, and on-chain voting activity. The policy aims to establish a transparent, consistent, and principled approach to voting and proposal evaluation in alignment with our responsibilities within the **Polkadot** ecosystem.

This proposal outlines the fundamental mechanisms of our voting system and defines its key operational rules as follows:

DOTs delegated to Permanence DAO through the Web3 Foundation’s **Decentralized Voices program** are governed by our recently updated [CoI Policy](https://voting.opensquare.io/p/502):

- The DAO **abstains** from voting on any proposal that directly or indirectly benefits any core member.
- Only **core members present at the time of DV election** may vote using these delegated funds.
- For votes using **DAO-owned funds**, only the member with a conflict is required to abstain; others may vote freely.


After our decision to separate the voting power of the DAO's **own funds** from the DOTs delegated by the **DV program**, voting power of the DAO's **own funds** will be distributed with a final 54% to 46% split between the core members and the community members respectively. The core members **always retain a 54% majority at the least**, and the split process is **dynamic** as more community members join to prevent any single community member of wielding too much voting power.


Proposals are categorized into **five priority levels**. Each level determines how urgently the DAO must act:

- **Priority 1–2 (High urgency)**: Structural or large treasury proposals. Require action within 1–2 weeks, with feedback and reminders sent throughout.
- **Priority 3 (Medium spenders):** Make up one-third of all proposals. Require a 2-week deadline with minimal reminders.
- **Priority 4–5 (Low spenders/tippers):** Require fast but minimal effort decisions.

The following outlines the quorum and majority requirements for each proposal track to be voted as Aye, in cases where the majority of votes are Abstain, the final vote is cast as Abstain:​

- **Priority 1** (e.g., Root, Fellowship Admin): **60% quorum, 57% majority.​**
- **Priority 2** (e.g., Big Spender, Treasurer): **60% quorum, 57% majority.​**
- **Priority 3** (Medium Spender): **50% quorum, 50% majority.​**
- **Priority 4** (Small Spender, Big Tipper): **35% quorum, 50% majority.​**
- **Priority 5** (Small Tipper): **30% quorum, 50% majority.​**

The detailed voting policy will be posted in its entirety on our public [document hub](https://docs.permanence.io/) for new members and the Polkadot community to familiarize themselves. **The policy will be in effect after the internal vote is concluded until further voting by the core members to change parts, or the whole if it. Failure to comply with the voting policy outlined above may result in demotion from the core membership and may, for repeat offenders and after taking an internal vote,  result in removal from the DAO.**

Please vote at your convenience. Members and the wider community are welcome to suggest additions or amendments.

Kind regards.