# Governance ## OpenGov ### Problems * Complexity * Occasional failures in Referenda * People making a curator a proxy controlled by a multisig, then changing the multisig * Sheer number of Treasury proposals * Different topics - hard for anyone to be an expert in everything * "Big spender" / "little spender" etc. are not really the way people think of things * Community anger / agitation * Whale issue * Many of the people who participate are not raising the discourse (e.g. user "None" on Polkassembly) * Large variance in participation * Variance in amount of work between Polkadot and Kusama (many, many more Referenda on Polkadot) * Binary decisions * Long lead times ### Potential Solutions * Fewer Treasury Proposals, more bounties * This is the biggest "bang for the buck", I think. Discouraging _every_ funding proposal from going through TPs would solve a lot of problems. * 'Locked' TPs (curators approve that work was done.. this is very similar to bounties, but can be done by making the payee a multisig with arbiter(s)) * DF funding for Polkassembly or other UIs? * This also solves _a lot_ of problems * Easier way to cancel/kill referenda ### Open Questions ## Decentralized Voices ### Problems * It's possible to avoid DV delegates by going on Treasurer track (or Root track) * Selection criteria was opaque * There should be more input from the community on the selection process * It's a LOT of work, especially on the Polkadot side, which is not compensated * Being a DV delegate can be stressful, with complaints from others in the ecosystem * We should have better guardrails against corruption * Clearer rules * What can you vote on / can't vote on? * Clarify you can't change votes from old candidates * Chaos can ensue by changing all of the delegates out after three months ### Decentralized Voices Changes #### Simple/Uncontroversial 1. Add Treasurer track to delegations 2. Formalize selection criteria 3. Decision-making from the community a. Gathering people #### Simple/Controversial 1. Allow users to remain in DV for more than one iteration a. Potentially only DAOs? 1. Payment in locked DOT a. This could also be a tip afterwards, to make it more community-oriented 1. Perhaps change cohorts from 3 months to 4/6? I was thinking this could be done after the first two cohorts, so that we can learn about issues quickly. * Allow some percentage of delegates to remain for two in a row or ongoing? * Perhaps have a rule that only DAOs can be re-delegated multiple times in a row? * ... or maybe allow only DAOs to participate instead of individuals, or incentivize this somehow? #### Difficult/Uncontroversial #### Difficult/Controversial 1. Could we anonymize votes somehow? This would be controversial, and would likely be technically difficult and/or require significant work on our end.