---
# System prepended metadata

title: Governance

---

# 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.