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

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

Terminated

terminated

Description

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.

Appendants

1

#1

1mo ago

🟢 4 • 🔴 4 • ⚪️ 1
Required majority (more than 50%) of non-abstain votes not met.
Vote #1: NAY
Voting Members: 9
No CoI reported. DV delegation exercised.
https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/25857993-2
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1535#5

Optionssingle

Votes·10

15fT...yBzL

15fT...yBzL

15fTH34bbKGMUjF1bLmTqxPYgpg481imThwhWcQfCyktyBzL

Nay

# 2

I left my comments on the public proposal. It's unacceptable for me to propose that the Polkadot treasury, the shared asset of every token holder regardless of their nation and background, should subsidize military projects for the EU or German armies, or any business development efforts related to them. Plus, there is absolutely zero transparency in the document, which puts this proposal in total contradiction with the ecosystem's "Less Trust, More Truth" motto. As we innovate in technology, there should also be efforts to develop new ways of doing business and building relationships. I simply can't find a single metric in the proposal to evaluate it on reasonable grounds. A very, very resounding NAY.

1ZSP...vx6w

1ZSP...vx6w

1ZSPR3zNg5Po3obkhXTPR95DepNBzBZ3CyomHXGHK9Uvx6w

Aye

# 1

Generally supportive as I've worked closely with the PoKe team regarding BD matters and I believe they have a genuine focus on getting enterprise and institutional adoption for Polkadot. The main suggestion I would make for the propsoal is to find a way to share information more widely, as it's probably difficult for the community to judge this effort with the understandable vagueness in wording.

12s6...nE8h

12s6...nE8h

12s6UMSSfE2bNxtYrJc6eeuZ7UxQnRpUzaAh1gPQrGNFnE8h

Aye

# 1

Supportive given PoKe's contributions to date, but recommend that future funding be linked to clear KPIs and improved transparency.

14gM...deVb

14gM...deVb

14gMJV95zwxUsFEZDSC8mtBVifS6SypKJkfBKANkMsLZdeVb

Nay

# 2

Business development is important, but lack of transparency and the direction make me doubt the ROI.

1xzc...1bX6

1xzc...1bX6

1xzcLSwo7xBFkJYZiL4EHaqFpuPTkH641E3V43W4cuk1bX6

Aye

# 1

We support the work Poke is doing. Giving the team a chance to close on some of their BD deals is reasonable. However, we hope to see some results from this initiative that will translate into on-chain activity. That will strongly influence our decision to support future funding requests from the PoKe team.

14Gn...YLEh

14Gn...YLEh

14Gn7SEmCgMX7Ukuppnw5TRjA7pao2HFpuJo39frB42tYLEh

Abstain

# 3

I recognize that PoKe have members on their team who are working hard for Polkadot, however, I think the lack of progress or demonstrations of progress are worrisome. The situation they are going through makes me more inclined to vote Abstain.

12Kt...DCoJ

12Kt...DCoJ

12KtA8mtfsK1CyQb4utLiwG3ao22z77w2cM2GqnaL2RiDCoJ

Nay

# 2

If resilience is the goal, Polkadot’s tech should naturally attract groups that truly need blockchain solutions. Although I respect the work this team has done, I'm still not sold on BD being a good use of treasury resources at this time. The proposal feels too vague ... and while I understand BD often involves some uncertainty, this leaves too little to be excited about given the size of the ask.

13ED...KQbF

13ED...KQbF

13EDmaUe89xXocPppFmuoAZaCsckaJy3deAyVyiykk1zKQbF

Aye

# 1

Would like to see more info on the LOI's in place to substantiate the BD work going into this. We understand BD takes time and sometimes is a lost cost. Understanding what a "partnership" looks like is crucial- and hoping that it translates to using the network in a significant way. Even still, this is an Aye.

12Hi...E9N3

12Hi...E9N3

12His7t3EJ38tjdBbivUzWQeaNCLKfMqtKp1Ed3xHMyCE9N3

Nay

# 2

While I have absolutely no problem with Poke teams efforts and would actually commend them on their hard work on bringing Polkadot to these institutions, I have a problem with asking for money from the treasury with so little detail, very vague wording and no breakdown of the progress of these leads. I do understand that there are NDA's and obviously the team is concerned about poaching but then why not go through one of the many other funding channels available in the ecosystem, involve far less people in the decision making who can either sign NDAs themselves or can act discreet about these leads. There is just no way for us as a DV to do our due diligence and judge the risks involved in AYE'ing this request for funding. So, while I personally believe PoKe team to be working hard on behalf of the ecosystem, I can't vote AYE for something that's (looking at the proposal) only rests on blind trust on the team.

167Y...TY9F

167Y...TY9F

167YoKNriVtP4Nxk9F9GRV7HTKu5VnxaRq1pKMANAnmmTY9F

Nay

# 2

I was inclined to vote Aye on this proposal, because if in 6 months they can close all this DB it would be a net positive to the ecosystem. On the other hand, they have had 6 years so far without a clear market fit solution that would take them to where they should be at this point on time, and this makes think is not the technology but the team driving it. The Chinese and African markets at first look seem great, but the fact that to see any returns on this and previous investments is not going to take 6 months but probably years of more investment, with suck a vague proposal lacking clear outcomes and deliverables I feel forced to vote against it.

Discussions·0

No current comments

Information

Snapshot

IPFS

Timestamp

Created

Apr 22 2025 15:39

Start date

Apr 22 2025 00:00

End date

May 22 2025 00:00

Results

Voters

10

one-person-one-vote

Aye

4 VOTE

Nay

5 VOTE

Abstain

1 VOTE

Product

Resources

Social Links

Contact

© 2025 OpenSquare. All Rights Reserved.