If you want to have a smaller group of decision makers, then we could literally bring back the council, which means phragmen voting for the council of people that will decide the up to 10k spending for N people.
Basically, this is just taking a representative approach to a direct voting system.
Given the fact that blockchains can handle direct voting systems, I don’t see why a delegation system would be better, other than trying to centralize power (at perhaps the upside of a little less chaos).
In general, I dont think we should assume the Ambassadors have better insight into how spending should happen. Nor should we really make it a requirement that if you are an ambassador, that you are now responsible for how money is spent.
You should simply be an ambassador because you love and support the Polkadot ecosystem, and you do things to help in your own ways.
Could be making youtube videos, setting up meetups, going to your local governments, coding anonymously and making PRs, etc…
I think trying to pigeonhole ambassadors into some kind of spending / bizdev unit will end up in a worse program.
Shawn has covered everything perfectly so I don’t think I have anything to add here. I have read through all of your comments in the doc and have made a number of edits based on them so thank you!
Please add comments here or reach out to me, @DonDiegoSanchez or @lorena directly. We will open the document up for comments after the root ref submission on Thursday 31 October so we do not lose focus.
We will host an X space on Friday 1 November @ 1200 UTC for an open discussion.
We also have tomorrow’s X space for a final discussion on the manifesto but can also discuss this here if people want to bring comments to the table.
We will not be having an X Space tomorrow as we thought you might want a day off to think and absorb, but we will be bringing the Medium Spender Draft 2.0 by EOD and have 3 planned Google Meets for feedback on Monday and Tuesday next week.
The details are in Polkadot Discord Events and here.
Thanks for showing up, giving input, being kind, being honest and working on something that has a real shot at making a lasting impact.
We also have a new Discord coming - the Ambassador Fellowship Plaza - will share the details as soon as it’s ready.
Medium Spender Proposal 2.0 to support the Polkadot Ambassador Fellowship is available for you to immerse yourselves in. Comment, leave questions and I will gather them up for discussion on Monday (2 Google meets am and pm) and Tuesday (middle of the day). Check out the Polkadot Discord Events for details.
A heads up that we were unable to post the supporting medium spender proposal yesterday due to a slight hold up with the multi-sig. Due to the seniority and tenure of the people that we have asked to be on the Advisory Board, everyone needs to make sure they have the scope to commit to the Board for the duration of the establishment and incubation periods and whether there are any conflicts of interests or time preventing them from being available to fulfil the responsbilitiy of being part of the multi-sig.
We expect to post the referendum by the latest on Thursday 7 November. A tiny deviation from the roadmap which we have otherwise followed to the letter - that’s for bearing with us for this last step!
Now, a little note about me (and now us, @DonDiegoSanchez and @lorenablockya) we HATE missing deadlines. You will see that we have met every single deadline set in our timeline since the beginning of this process UNTIL NOW. We have already pushed back the medium spender ref from 5 Nov to 7 Nov and now we come to you with our hats in our hand asking for your understanding and acceptance of our FINAL DEADLINE of Monday 11 November.
The reason for the delay is at least a good one. We have an absolute crack team for an Advisory Board and we are doing all of the necessary DD to onboard them all and bring as many into the multi-sig as conflicts of interest will allow. This takes time and we were not able to start this process earlier as we needed to have a robust Manifesto by the community before we requested their time and dedication.
So, we can confirm that we have the following people on the Advisory Board and now named in the ref:
Chrissy Hill
Felix-Swarm [Multi-Sig]
Joe Petrowski
John Linden [Multi-Sig]
Mister Cole [Multi-Sig]
Otar Shakarishvili [Multi-Sig]
Rob Wood
Shawn Tabrizi [Multi-Sig]
We are waiting to hear back from an additional 4 people who we will not name in case they cannot make it work with their schedules but they are equally as trusted by the the community. Our creme de la creme
Some of the Board are not yet confirmed as being on the multi-sig as there may be some legalities preventing it, but we have at least 5 people on that are on the multi-sig already and 8 confirmed on the board.
Myself and DonDiego will also be on the multi-sig for administrative purposes. This group of people are doing this on top of an already packed schedule and I understand that the only way to streamline the process is from the inside - me from a hustling admin side and DonDiego from the tech admin. If anyone has any concerns at all about this or work arounds so that we do not need to be on it then we are all ears!
Now that both referenda have been submitted for voting by token holders—1267 and 1287—the Project Phoenix Advisory Board invites you to apply to be part of the incubation phase with funding for an initiative running from January to March 2025:
Applications are open until midnight on Sunday, 1 December 2024. They will then be reviewed by the Advisory Board, and all applicants will receive a response by Monday, 16 December 2024.
This funding is not tied to being seeded as an Ambassador within the program. For that, please reach out to @lulu_cldn or @DonDiegoSanchez on Telegram to be added to a group created to gauge how many people are interested in being part of the Ambassador Fellowship, should both referenda pass.
You can express interest in being seeded later without applying for funding for a specific initiative, but you cannot apply for funding if you do not also intend to be seeded as an Ambassador. Please note that all individuals named on the application form will be added to the Telegram group.
When applying to the Phragmèn Initiatives Fund, which will mimic as closely as possible the fund to be built by the Technical Fellowship if both referenda pass, please ensure that your initiative aligns with the DIRECT guidelines outlined in the Polkadot Ambassador Fellowship manifesto:
Dynamic: allows for fast feedback and iteration
Inclusive: open to anyone to participate
Resilient: adapts to challenges and remains effective
Equitable: ensures fairness in the selection process
Clear: places outcomes and transparency at the forefront
Trustless: relies on on-chain mechanisms for transparency and scalability
Additionally, since this period will aim to bootstrap the Ambassador Fellowship for a successful future, Project Phoenix Advisory Board will prioritise initiatives that meet these criteria:
Address a need that Polkadot has now and can begin to address in Q1 2025
Be ready to start on Monday, 6 January 2025
Have the potential to succeed in a “start-up” style environment, operating while the program is being built out
Include strong KPIs and budgeting plans for each month in Q1 2025, and be prepared to provide full transparency on deliverables and costs through reporting at the end of each month
I really like your idea about the mentioned “power balancing factors” in the Phragmen system, and I didn’t know it will work this way in practice within the Ambassador Fellowship.
I couldn’t find any description of this in the manifesto. Can we be sure that these power balancing “checks and balances” will indeed be coded into the Phragmen system? Because if so, it would be a huge relief for many small entities. Thanks for the answer!
We have tried to make it as straightforward as possible and explained in a bit more detail of what to expect from the Advisory Board and how best to prepare your submission. As we said on yesterday’s X space, everyone that replies will be seeded, it is not a case of being ‘selected’. The only difference may be is if the Advisory Board see any discrepancies in where you have ranked yourself, but this is an exploratory exercise for us all and all the ranks bring the same benefits - you can apply for phragmen funding, you will be part of the team building the programme from the inside and all voices count as equals. You also get a pretty smart title wherever you are ranked!
Excited to start seeing these come in and as always, any and all feedback welcome!
The big day is here!
