Background of Helena and DOTConnector:
I am Helena, the former Head of Parity Asia and a five-year veteran of the Polkadot ecosystem, dedicated to building and expanding Polkadot in the APAC market. As a strong believer in decentralization and an active investor, I initiated and served as Program Chair of the Web3.0 Bootcamp in 2020, 2021, and 2022. Additionally, I led initiatives such as the Polkadot Hackathon in APAC and the Substrate developer course, fostering talent and strengthening the ecosystem. I also serve as an advisor and board member for several projects within the Polkadot ecosystem. Currently, I am leading the DOTConnector initiative, organizing the regional ecosystem conference, Polkadot Decoded Asia, while continuing to support and contribute to the Polkadot ecosystem with a focus on the Asian market.
You can connect with me on LinkedIn or X account.
The Advantages:
-
Long-term Commitment & Leadership in the Polkadot Ecosystem
As the former head of Parity Asia, I led a nimble team focused on developing the Polkadot ecosystem and fostering the Substrate developer community across the region. This role gave me deep insights into the value systems and goals of Parity and the Web3 Foundation. I have firsthand experience in navigating the governance processes and driving impactful initiatives. My strong relationships within Parity and Web3 Foundation further enhance my ability to advocate effectively within the ecosystem. -
Project Growth & Ecosystem Involvement
Over the past four years, I have been deeply involved in onboarding and supporting the growth of numerous Polkadot ecosystem projects in Asia. My extensive understanding of key projects and parachain teams enables me to assess the historical contributions and future potential of each proposal with clarity and fairness. This experience makes me well-equipped to evaluate projects in a way that aligns with the broader goals of the Polkadot ecosystem. -
Media & KOL Networks for OpenGov Advocacy
Leveraging my wide network in Asia’s crypto media and key opinion leaders (KOLs), I am uniquely positioned to promote the Polkadot OpenGov program and its core values. I am committed to safeguarding the integrity of the governance process, especially in the face of misinformation and misinterpretation that have previously affected Polkadot’s reputation. My focus is on ensuring accurate, transparent communication to protect and strengthen Polkadot’s standing. -
Rich Experience of Polkadot Governance
As a longtime supporter and active participant in Polkadot’s governance evolution, from the internal test version, to Gov 1.0 to Gov 2.0 (OpenGov), I bring rich experience to the role of delegate. I believe strongly in decentralized, community-driven governance and am committed to maintaining the transparency, fairness, and inclusivity of the Polkadot OpenGov process.
Governance Philosophy:
Our governance philosophy centers on sustainable growth for Polkadot, underpinned by the core values of Pragmatism, Transparency, and Fairness. We emphasize pragmatic, flexible decision-making, adapting our approach as on-chain governance evolves. Rationality drives our decisions, ensuring they are based on evidence and logical reasoning, free from external pressures. We prioritize efficient resource use, backing only mission-driven projects that align with community goals and contribute to long-term ecosystem growth. Transparency is key—voting plans are publicly disclosed, and we engage in open discussions, avoiding confidential agreements. Guided by integrity, we support proposals that are results-oriented, with clear objectives, implementation plans, and realistic costs.Every proposal is evaluated on its merit, with fairness and inclusivity at the heart of our governance process, ensuring equal consideration for all proposers.
Key Criteria for Proposal Evaluation:
When voting, we prioritize the following principles:
- Treasury Justification: We uphold the principle of for the community, by the community, and of the community. Proposals must benefit the broader Polkadot ecosystem and demonstrate a clear alignment with this value.
- Long-term Value: We support proposals that demonstrate a long-term vision and commitment to sustained ecosystem development. We avoid short-sighted, FOMO-driven decisions.
- Reasonable Budget: We carefully review budget requests to ensure they are realistic and proportional to the scope and value of the project. Proposals with inflated or unjustified funding requests will be scrutinized.
- DOT Impact: We assess the potential of initiatives to positively influence the Polkadot ecosystem, including whether they might contribute to the long-term value of DOT.
Besides the general criteria, Asia regional focus and developer community driven will be our additional preference due to our solid roots and the long-time expertise from the Polkadot Asia.
- Aye (Support):
- Common Good Projects with a proven track record in the Polkadot ecosystem, especially those with a strong presence in the Asian market or initiatives that contribute to the development of the Polkadot network and the Polkadot ecosystem.
- Developer-Centric Initiatives that foster growth and support the Substrate developer community, as this has been a core focus of Parity Asia and remains a priority in our governance approach.
- Marketing Proposals with a clear, strategic value proposition that are realistically budgeted and show direct benefits to Polkadot.
- Nay (Reject):
- Overpriced or Inflated Proposals that include excessive marketing spend with little to no direct value to the Polkadot ecosystem. Projects that prioritize flashy campaigns over substance will not receive support.
- New Projects with No Proven Commitment: While we welcome new builders, proposals requesting funding without any prior track record or tangible progress will be rejected, as they indicate a lack of long-term commitment.
- Abstain:
- Proposals Outside the Scope of Our Expertise: If the initiative lacks relevance or impact in the Asian market, it may be voted as Abstain due to limited contextual relevance and lack of alignment with regional priorities.
- Proposals with Potential but Lacking Detail: If the initiative is backed by a strong reputation but lacks sufficient detail to make an informed decision, we will abstain and provide constructive feedback.
- Premature Initiative: Proposals that show promise but clearly premature will lead to an abstention, allowing the proposer to refine their approach and resubmit when the conditions are more favorable.
Feedback Process: Transparency and Open Communication
We believe that constructive feedback is essential to fostering growth and improving proposals. Our feedback process is structured as follows:
- Pre-Vote Comments and Questions: Before casting a vote, we actively engage with proposers by leaving questions and comments to clarify uncertainties or gain further insights. This allows proposers to address potential concerns early in the process.
- Post-Vote Feedback: Once we cast our vote, we will provide clear reasoning and detailed feedback that explains the rationale behind our decision. Whether it’s an “Aye,” “Nay,” or “Abstain,” we ensure that our decision is transparent and well-supported.
- Open Communication Channels: We will provide communication channels for further discussion, allowing proposers to share additional information or ask questions. These channels will remain open after voting to ensure continued dialogue and understanding.