Polkadot Community Foundation: Conditions on transferring funds to Centrifuge-related instruments
Based on a current discussion around Centrifuge’s future development, its community has opened CP141: to initiate the development of Centrifuge V3, a multi-chain, EVM-based protocol
Abstract: This proposal seeks governance approval to initiate the development of Centrifuge V3, an EVM-based protocol, to drive the next phase of growth for the RWA market. Built as a multi-chain system, this next-generation protocol will introduce features such as chain abstraction, modularity for diverse assets and investors, and enhanced composability with DeFi. The protocol will also migrate governance and CFG token support to an EVM chain, aligning with the ecosystem where the majority of Centrifuge’s activity already resides. This initiative positions Centrifuge to lead the rapidly growing RWA space and meet the evolving needs of institutions and DeFi participants.
Based on the info provided, if this proposal is accepted, the technology of Centrifuge will move from a Polkadot parachain to an EVM-based protocol. Polkadot is currently adding EVM support to Asset Hub, and Centrifuge can choose to deploy its protocol on Asset Hub once this is live. From the discussion, it is not clear whether Centrifuge will deploy its protocol on Polkadot Asset Hub or not: This wish for change proposal aims to condition the transfer of funds from PCF to Centrifuge related instruments subject to the requirement that the Centrifuge protocol is migrated to Polkadot Asset Hub, with special attention to past approved proposals on relay chain governance.
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/referendum/1122
WFC: The Polkadot Community Foundation (PCF) shall not transfer funds to Centrifuge related instruments that was previously approved under https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/referendum/1122 until the continuation of the existence of Centrifuge in the Polkadot ecosystem is confirmed after the finalisation of https://gov.centrifuge.io/t/cp141-initiate-the-development-of-centrifuge-v3-a-multi-chain-evm-based-protocol/6734/11 and subsequent discussions / proposals in Centrifuge governance.
The system.remarkWithEvent has been hashed due to being too long, you can verify it by checking the preimage
0xfb2f0a1ed92ce82767ce65e8294296c39ad5e7ecbbd3c130ccde890b5700c32d
Or you can see the plain text on SubSquare:
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1441
system.remarkWithEvent:
Polkadot Community Foundation (PCF) shall not transfer funds to Centrifuge related instruments that was previously approved under https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/referendum/1122 until the continuation of the existence of Centrifuge in the Polkadot ecosystem is confirmed after the finalisation of https://gov.centrifuge.io/t/cp141-initiate-the-development-of-centrifuge-v3-a-multi-chain-evm-based-protocol/6734/11 and subsequent discussions / proposals in Centrifuge governance.
Comments (9)
Proposal Failed
2
of 3Summary
0%
Aye
0%
Nay
Aye (38)0.0 DOT
Support0.0 DOT
Nay (21)0.0 DOT
Comments (9)
Hi Leemo
Just some details:
- In accordance with Ref# 1122 the Polkadot Community Foundation shouldn't transfer to Centrifuge but instead to Anemoy LTF (issuer).
It’s also important to note that the beneficiary wallet listed is the Polkadot Community Foundation multi-sig wallet - in no way is Centrifuge involved as an added layer of risk in being responsible for sending back the 1.5M.
- Polkadot Community Foundation received the requested amount on 28th September 2024; since that day, the funds have never been invested until today ( 140 days from the receiving date).
what's the initial reason for these assets to be idling at asset hub for this long?
seems to me that the clear reason here for abandoning their own parachain is to cut down maintenance costs of the protocol that does not require the scalability of running its own parachain. i feel that a much more productive bargaining approach would be raising a governance vote on centrifuge about deploying contracts on polkadot q3 rather than having a bunch of fiat assets idling around in a lose-lose situation.
Hi Leemo
Just some details:
what's the initial reason for these assets to be idling at asset hub for this long?
seems to me that the clear reason here for abandoning their own parachain is to cut down maintenance costs of the protocol that does not require the scalability of running its own parachain. i feel that a much more productive bargaining approach would be raising a governance vote on centrifuge about deploying contracts on polkadot q3 rather than having a bunch of fiat assets idling around in a lose-lose situation.