JUST 2.0 Retroactive Compensation for Contributions to the Polkadot Ecosystem
We, Otar and Raul of JUST Ventures GmbH, are submitting a second retroactive funding proposal to the Polkadot Treasury, following the approval of our first request covering 01.12.2022 – 31.03.2024. This new proposal seeks funding for our contributions from 01.04.2024 – 31.12.2024.
Over this period, our work has included supporting and executing runtime upgrades, facilitating OpenGov implementation, guiding treasury proposals, providing technical assistance, managing governance discussions, supervising bounties, and engaging in key ecosystem initiatives. We have also been involved in projects like the Polkadot Ecosystem Map and the Polkadot Community Foundation advisory process among others.
The requested funding will allow us to compensate for the work done and continue our work within the Polkadot ecosystem, focusing on governance, technical support, and community initiatives. By maintaining a retroactive funding model, we ensure that contributions are compensated based on actual work completed rather than estimated upfront. To further simplify financial planning, minimise volatility, and align with community standards, this time around, we are requesting compensation in Stablecoins.
Beyond financial reimbursement, the approval of this proposal also signals the community’s intent for us to continue our work under these same retroactive terms.
We have generated a hash of the document associated with this proposal for verifiability. Anyone can confirm that the document has not been altered by downloading it as a PDF from Google Docs and computing its hash. If the resulting hash matches the value:
0x93aa396d605cb910d3448ae64cee1df47de699f46689b5b5cb9ea6158ab362cc
the document is verified as authentic.
Discussion Post: https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2823
Proposal: HERE.
Comments (9)
Requested
Proposal Passed
Summary
0%
Aye
0%
Nay
Aye (66)0.0 DOT
Support0.0 DOT
Nay (32)0.0 DOT
We will be voting NAY on retroactive referenda of these characteristics, specifically of high value. To us, it is a better way to outline a plan of action to follow what deliveries were fulfilled and what deliveries were not fulfilled as opposed as this high value retroactive approach which leaves the specifics of the work done with the listed projects as an exercise to the reader and the inclusion of an honor system for reported work which will be abused by other teams if this became the norm.
For those two reasons we believe that this is not a "golden standard for retroactive referenda" as it was mentioned on AAG. So we would prefer that well known teams such as these one as well as newcomers take the non-retroactive route. This idea will be heavily enforced on our vote starting on cohort 4's term as described on our DV cohort 4 application: https://forum.polkadot.network/t/decentralized-voices-cohort-4-saxemberg/11868
Hey @Saxemberg Governance, appreciate the feedback! We understand the concerns around high-value retroactive proposals and the importance of oversight, accountability, and clear deliverables. That said, we strongly believe that in cases like this, a retroactive compensation model is not only justified but also the fairest approach for both contributors and the ecosystem. Here’s why we structured this proposal this way:
We respect your stance, but the blanket rejection of high-value retroactive proposals does not take into account the particular nature of these deliverables. What matters is what work was done, whether it had an impact, and whether the compensation is justified. That’s what this referendum does.
Of course, we also hear the concerns around setting a timeframe for retroactive requests and acknowledge that rather than having an arbitrary window setting a clear standard (e.g., 3-6 months) could help streamline future discussions. If that becomes a widely accepted guideline, we’ll take it into account moving forward.
The discussion post link is broken
@TheMvp07 there seems to be an issue with Polkassembly hyperlinks feature because the link I use keeps changing after saved. But here is the URL to this message:
https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2823
I also added this in the contextual information.