[Proposal: MR4] Polkassembly OpenGov development

hey sir, you can place all the corresponding information here please, so users have everything at hand, to give their feedback

As mentions @turrizt , must first have a discussion here in the forum, before placing it on chain since the proposal is already on chain, I don’t know if it can be canceled on his part so as not to lose the bond, or if depending on the feedback received, there is some change, come to an agreement, like return the surplus, etc

1 Like

From my point of view, since moonbase is also included in the cost, this maybe can be split with moonbeam, since there will be a proposal for moonbean too, when opengov is implemented

and also, seems like is not possible vote with talisman in polkassembly, can we know if there is a problem that can be solved , so all users can participate using polkassembly and not go to polkadot.js

1 Like

Hey everyone, we had been working with foundation for covering the costs of expenses made for development and maintenance of Polkassembly for the networks.
OpenGov development is the first time we are reaching out to the treasury and community and hence the lack of information on the process.
Few points that I wanted to highlight -

  1. Since the proposal is already on-chain, after the discussion period of 5+ days on this forum, if there is no major change suggested in the proposal, we could move forward with the same proposal already put on chain.
  2. The market volatility has been significant since we put the proposal, and once the proposal passes, the $ amount of MOVR might not be equal to the expenses incurred. In that case, we propose adding the difference amount to our proposal on Moonbeam network post OpenGov deployment for Moonbeam.
1 Like

Hi @jas_jaski, could you please provide a more detailed breakdown of the costs?

1 Like

I agree with Marcelo, in the google doc, you see the tasks but not the costs associated with each one

following my previous comment, I would like to see how much is the cost associated with the integration in moonbase

1 Like

Hey @jose.crypto @mtca

We have edited the link of the google doc and worked on the pointers mentioned by the community members.

Please refer to the snippet below for a detailed breakdown of the costs as per the themes. Please note, details of the tasks within the themes are provided in the same document for the benefit of the community.

Happy to provide further information based on inquiries by the council and community.


1 Like

Thank you for your feedback.

We will provide the Talisman integration with moonbeam as well, so that users can leverage Polkassembly directly for all their governance needs!

The ETA for this task should be 18th of March and we can get back to you as soon as it is live

1 Like

Thank you for your response @Parambir , regarding the amount requested for the Moonbase work (10k $) We would kindly ask you to split it into two proposals, one for moonriver worth 20% of the total requested amount in MOVR and one on moonbeam totaling 80% of the total in GLMR.
Please use a 30-day-average price.

Since the proposal is already on-chain in Moonriver, the excess amount must be returned to the treasury expeditiously.

I support the proposal itself, since having an interface for on-chain governance is essential, only with these changes mentioned above


Sure @jose.crypto!

The method used for calculation by the team will be a 30 Average Price with a 10% buffer for volatility.

We will add a comment regarding the total amount that would be refunded to the treasury based on the date of funds disbursement. A separate proposal will be created for Moonbeam development costs as mentioned on the proposal and discussed in the thread.

Thank you


please expect to receive 2 approval comments more from the Council members, before to apply the proposal on-chain

1 Like

Hey @Parambir - just to make sure - the volatility buffer will be cleared with the return of the funds if the payout was higher at the day of transfer right?

If so I hereby state my support as a treasury council member :pray:


Same feedback as sik’s on my end


Sure, we can clear the volatility buffer along with the excess payment.

This is how the process will flow →

  1. After receiving approval from the treasury, Polkassembly will be credited funds as per the proposal
  2. Polkassembly will calculate the 30 day Average Price, remove 80% of the component for Moonbase and return excess funds as per the day on which the funds are credited
  3. The remaining costs for Moonbase and Moonbeam will be added via a separate proposal

We hope things are clear and we can proceed with the disbursement. Looking forward to the final approval :slight_smile:

1 Like

Awesome! Thanks.
You got approval by Jose, mtca and myself so feel free to get it on-chain :pray:

1 Like

Thank you!

The proposal is on chain on the following link - https://moonriver.polkassembly.network/treasury/4

Looking forward to your support in getting this into voting!

CC: @dev0_sik @jose.crypto


just to make it clear to the community

this proposal seeks to pay 12k $

$10k for Moonriver related work
and 2k for moonbase work

with 30 days average price.
therefore the surplus must be returned


That is correct @jose.crypto, thank you for the clarification!


hey, just to inform, that the proposal has already been passed to motion, and accepted

So at the next start of the spend period, the funds should be distributed


thank you for the processing of the proposal. The amount has been received by the the Polkassembly team.

As per the 30 day average price, the MOVR token close price was 8.96$ (source Coingecko). The total invoice amount of $12,000 equates to approximately 1340 MOVR tokens

The remaining tokens 889 MOVR (2229-1340) will be sent back to the treasury by the team.

Hope this sounds okay.


1 Like

hey sir, yes correct, please announce here along with the tx, when the amount is returned to the treasury

1 Like