As a seasoned crypto investor with a knack for understanding complex blockchain technologies, I’ve been intrigued by Polkadot’s evolution, particularly its governance mechanism known as OpenGov. Having witnessed the rise and fall of numerous projects, I appreciate a platform that values community involvement and stakeholder expectations above all else.
In simpler terms, Polkadot‘s governance system enables the network to adapt and grow according to the expectations of its users over time. The main objective of this governance is to empower a majority of the users to control and manage the network.
Polkadot employs innovative techniques like a flexible version of the state transition function, which is stored on the blockchain and defined using a language that’s independent of the platform. It also includes voting mechanisms within the blockchain itself. Any adjustments to the protocol require consensus through stake-weighted votes in community referenda.
Understanding Polkadot OpenGov
In its initial phase, Polkadot’s governance structure (Governance V1) was made up of three key elements: The Technical Committee, The Council, and the community. This governance setup was designed to manage treasury funds effectively for prompt updates and repairs. However, under Governance V1, all proposals were given equal importance since only one proposal could be put to a vote at any moment, leading to a prolonged voting process that lasted several weeks. Furthermore, an alternating schedule allowed for voting on either a community referendum or a council motion every 28 days. This resulted in the examination of a limited number of proposals rather than a comprehensive review of numerous ones.
As an analyst, I’d rephrase that as follows: In my view, Polkadot OpenGov enhances decision-making processes within the system. It streamlines and agiles the impact of any referendum, thus increasing the number of collective decisions made by the network. Furthermore, Polkadot OpenGov aims to further decentralize Polkadot by proposing certain adjustments.
Shifting the duties of the Council to the general public by implementing a direct voting system for decision-making purposes, thereby promoting a more participatory democratic model.
Dissolving the current Council collective.
Giving users more ways to delegate voting power to community members.
Establishing the Polkadot Technical Fellowship and dissolving the Technical Committee.
How Does Polkadot OpenGov Work?
The public initiates all proposals on Polkadot OpenGov. After it is proposed, the proposal enters a Lead-in period, following which it follows a specific Track. The Track has a dedicated Origin. There are 15 Origins in total, each with a different track. The parameters for Origins and Tracks are preset values that set the duration of the referendum and how many can be simultaneously voted upon.
As someone who has worked in various roles within the grant application process, I can attest to the importance of having flexible submission options for proposals. Based on my personal experience, I have noticed that not all ideas require the same level of funding or attention. Therefore, allowing applicants to submit their proposals to different tracks depending on the amount requested is a practical solution. For instance, smaller projects can be submitted to the Small Tipper track, while larger projects requiring substantial funds can be directed to the Medium or Big Spender Track. Furthermore, giving the Technical Fellowship the ability to whitelist proposals enacted through the Whitelist Caller origin can expedite the process and reduce the wait time for these proposals. From my perspective, this approach streamlines the application process and ensures that each proposal receives the appropriate level of consideration.
For each track, there are unique Approval and Support thresholds set according to the origin’s rights. If these conditions are met during a specific timeframe, the referendum is approved and will be implemented after the enactment period ends. Furthermore, it’s possible to cast votes for multiple referenda within or across tracks all at once.
In Polkadot’s OpenGov system, there’s a feature called multi-role delegations. With this feature, token owners can assign their voting rights for various tracks to entities that specialize in evaluating referenda submitted on specific tracks. For instance, if a token owner doesn’t have the technical knowledge to assess the merits and vote on referenda submitted to the Root track, they can delegate their voting power to a trusted expert who can act in the network’s best interest. This way, even when token owners aren’t familiar with governance matters, their votes can still be significant.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-08-01 16:13