[WFC] KSM #538 - Counter WFC: More tools for DAOs in AssetHub

Fa6m...wiBr

End

active

Description

https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/538

A proposal suggests adding new tools for DAOs (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations) in AssetHub.
It focuses on technical upgrades without telling W3F or DVs how to operate.
The goal is to help DAOs work better on-chain.
New tools would include:
- A voting system for DAO decisions.
- A way to manage DAO memberships.
- A system to organize and control DAOs.
- Custom settings for DAO governance.
These tools were tested on Kreivo and worked well.
Adding them to AssetHub will give DAOs more power, especially with future smart contracts.

Appendants

6d ago

🟢 1 • 🔴 4 • ⚪️ 3
6-member quorum not met.
Vote #1: NAY
10 available members.
No CoI reported. DV delegation exercised.
https://kusama.subscan.io/extrinsic/28928132-2
https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/538#2

3d ago

🟢 1 • 🔴 3 • ⚪️ 6
6 members abstained, higher than the 5-member threshold.
Vote #2: ABSTAIN
10 available members.
No CoI reported. DV delegation exercised.
https://kusama.subscan.io/extrinsic/28977468-2
https://kusama.subsquare.io/referenda/538#3

Cast your votesingle

1ZSP...vx6w

1ZSPR3zNg5Po3obkhXTPR95DepNBzBZ3CyomHXGHK9Uvx6w

Nay

# 2

I'd like to see what is being proposed here in a simple and clear way (perhaps with milestones and timelines), without having to figure out what this means: "Counter proposal to WFC#535. This proposal focuses only on the technical parts of the previous WFC without dictating anything about how W3F or DVs should operate." In addition, I would like to know if this could be built with smart contracts on Polkadot Hub rather than pallets

1xzc...1bX6

1xzcLSwo7xBFkJYZiL4EHaqFpuPTkH641E3V43W4cuk1bX6

Nay

# 2

We think there needs to be more discussion around this topic

13ED...KQbF

13EDmaUe89xXocPppFmuoAZaCsckaJy3deAyVyiykk1zKQbF

Abstain

# 3

14Gn...YLEh

14Gn7SEmCgMX7Ukuppnw5TRjA7pao2HFpuJo39frB42tYLEh

Abstain

# 3

I don't deny that such tools can be useful, but I'm not sure how much use it can really get. For now, I abstain.

12s6...nE8h

12s6UMSSfE2bNxtYrJc6eeuZ7UxQnRpUzaAh1gPQrGNFnE8h

Abstain

# 3

We have mixed feelings. Some tools could certainly be useful for DAOs. But is it sensible to create a framework for them at this stage? We are not sure, so we are abstaining.

14gM...deVb

14gMJV95zwxUsFEZDSC8mtBVifS6SypKJkfBKANkMsLZdeVb

Nay

# 2

Before complex and expensive on-chain tools, I believe we should spend more resources on off-chain tools. It's enough if we can provide verifiability in most cases.

15fT...yBzL

15fTH34bbKGMUjF1bLmTqxPYgpg481imThwhWcQfCyktyBzL

Abstain

# 3

I'm switching to abstain following my discussion with Daniel on the public Telegram chat, my original comments follow. :: I'm not sure why we're using on-chain referenda for these discussions. Forums, public calls, X, and other social platforms seem to provide a better medium.

12Kt...DCoJ

12KtA8mtfsK1CyQb4utLiwG3ao22z77w2cM2GqnaL2RiDCoJ

Aye

# 1

Seems reasonable to me as it aims to lower the barrier for DAOs to implement on-chain governance and identity management on AssetHub

12Hi...E9N3

12His7t3EJ38tjdBbivUzWQeaNCLKfMqtKp1Ed3xHMyCE9N3

Abstain

# 3

Is this really needed? Would love to hear from other DAOs in the community if there is a use for these pallets?

167Y...TY9F

167YoKNriVtP4Nxk9F9GRV7HTKu5VnxaRq1pKMANAnmmTY9F

Abstain

# 3

Votes·10

Discussions·0