PolkaWorld, the Chinese community for Polkadot, recently announced a halt in its operations due to the rejection of its proposal. This marks the first time in its four-year history, since its inception in 2019, that it has had to pause. The changes leading to this decision occurred after Polkadot initiated its #OpenGov initiative. The primary aim of OpenGov, as understood from Polkadot’s mechanisms and as indicated by @gavofyork, was to decentralize Polkadot’s governance and make the Treasury more transparent and efficient. However, the most debated issue currently is the treasury management under OpenGov. This has impacted long-term contributors and organizations, with many facing rejection from the treasury, leading them to depart from the Polkadot ecosystem.
In the past, Polkadot’s governance system had a “professional” council elected by DOT holders, who utilized their expertise to assess proposals. PolkaWorld suggests that this approach should be incorporated into the OpenGov system, emphasizing that “decentralization only works for the ‘informed’.”
Furthermore, PolkaWorld has interviewed DOT holders who expressed concerns about applicants converting treasury funds into cash, which they believe adversely affects them. As a result, they often vote against such proposals. This has led to suggestions that the treasury might consider alternative funding methods, such as using tokens like #USDT.
Markian Ivanichok, in a series of tweets dated 15th September, highlighted the challenges faced by developers and teams in the Polkadot ecosystem. He mentioned that despite having an approved development contract and delivering the work, the payment was denied without any explanation. This was in reference to the OpenBrush project, a base ink! library. The link provided led to a detailed account of the milestones achieved for the project on kusama.polkassembly.io. Ivanichok expressed his disappointment with the governance system of Polkadot, stating, “Governance is one of the brightest features that Polkadot is so proud about. This is the outcome. The smart/social contract not being honored. Governance drastically failed.”
He further announced the decision of the @Brushfam_io team to leave the Polkadot ecosystem, citing a lack of appreciation for their work and challenges in the ecosystem that doesn’t prioritize users, business practices, or marketing. However, he later updated that the OpenBrush repository on GitHub was made available again for all financed milestones, apologizing for the initial oversight.
The decision to temporarily remove the OpenBrush repository from GitHub drew criticism from the community. A user, @wl_null, commented on the move, stating that many teams supported and utilized the openbrush library and that removing it was detrimental to the developer community.
In conclusion, the recent changes in Polkadot’s governance system have stirred debates and concerns among its community members. The challenges faced by contributors and the subsequent decisions they make will shape the future of the Polkadot ecosystem.
Disclaimer & Copyright Notice: The content of this article is for informational purposes only and is not intended as financial advice. Always consult with a professional before making any financial decisions. This material is the exclusive property of Blockchain.News. Unauthorized use, duplication, or distribution without express permission is prohibited. Proper credit and direction to the original content are required for any permitted use.
Image source: Shutterstock
