Notice: Polkadot has migrated to AssetHub. Balances, data, referenda, and other on-chain activity has moved to AssetHub.Learn more
Removing curators from Games Bounty [38]
a year ago
Cancelled
The Games Bounty which was originally started as an experiment is proving to be extremely ineffective. The idea of having a large crowd of curators reach a super majority to decide on specific projects seems to be ineffective. On the other hand I observe that bounties with a small set of curators that are highly experienced (like for example DeFi Bounty) seem to be extremely effective Hopefully some new leadership will take over this bounty or if not it's better to abandon it completely
Comments (2)
Proposal Failed
The prop lacks of basic information.
Thx in advance.
Making the decision to pass this ref is one thing. I don't have the insight to vote on that. But if this mode of bounty curation was an experiment, could you take 15 minutes out to write up in more detail what went wrong (and anything that went right) with the experiment? Even if you assume the proposal and decision on the next bounty curation will be made by you, sharing the knowledge that goes into that decision (that you gained from this experiment) will help others in the community to: . help improve proposals . and hold proposers to account where they are going wrong. Literally the strongest argument for having Opengov at all is in order to iterate towards effective decentralised forms of decision making. Experiments are expensive in time and money terms. The least we can do is make best use of their results.
@Mork
In this case the experiment was not expensive at all because the cost was exactly zero. Not a single DOT was spent by the bounty. The learnings are that a very large amount of curators well intentioned but incompetent are not going to deliver results. Good intentions are good but they're not enough. You need expertise. The ideal bounty is made of a few highly experienced people. As they say hell is paved with good intentions