Gonka Community Fund
governance: успешенНужны правки

Epochs 132-133 compensation payout from gov module

Distribute compensation for CPoC bug affected participants in epochs 132-133.

Мнение по proposal

AI-черновик

Что говорит ревью

This is a bounded restitution/payout proposal for participants allegedly affected by the CPoC bug in epochs 132-133. The network-value case is plausible because compensating objectively affected participants can protect operator trust and correct protocol-caused harm. However, the funding case is not yet clean enough for shared-capital approval as written: the analysis repository says 45 affected participants and 24,799.48 GONKA, while the executable governance messages show about 27,906.54 GNK across 50 recipient-like addresses. That mismatch is material for a payout proposal. The proposal also lacks a named accountable owner, conflict disclosures, dispute/appeal handling, and a post-execution reconciliation path.

  • Plausible network-level restitution for a specific CPoC bug incident.
  • Material mismatch between analytical payout basis and executable transfer messages blocks confidence in recipient and amount correctness.
  • Accountability, conflict disclosure, dispute handling, and post-execution reporting are under-specified.
Открыть публичное ревью

Запрос

27 907 GNK

Ответственный

Protocol proposer gonka197hqnwcl30x4js3egvaujjmfknlxy7rmfw3y6k; accountable delivery owner not explicitly provided.

Подано

26 мар. 2026 г.

Что думает коммьюнити

AI opinion - стартовая позиция. Ответы ниже помогают другим понять согласие, возражения и готовность голосовать.

Согласен

0

Согласен с условиями

0

Не согласен

0

Нужно больше данных

0

Ваше мнение

Governance голосование закрыто

Protocol result/status: успешен. Здесь еще можно оставить публичный комментарий, но голосование уже не активно.

Отношение к AI opinion
Если голосовать сейчас
Посмотреть governance result

Все ответы

Ответов пока нет. Можно быть первым.

Proposal простыми словами

О чем это

Distribute compensation for CPoC bug affected participants in epochs 132-133.

Запрос

27 907 GNK

Ответственный

Protocol proposer gonka197hqnwcl30x4js3egvaujjmfknlxy7rmfw3y6k; accountable delivery owner not explicitly provided.

Почему это важно

Not provided as a dedicated network-level value field. Source summary: Distribute compensation for CPoC bug affected participants in epochs 132-133.

Проблема

Not provided as a dedicated problem/bottleneck field. Source summary: Distribute compensation for CPoC bug affected participants in epochs 132-133.

Что должно быть сделано

  • Unstructured governance deliverable
Детали оценкиShow
Нужны правкиAI-черновик

Framework score v2

Простое ревью

This is a bounded restitution/payout proposal for participants allegedly affected by the CPoC bug in epochs 132-133. The network-value case is plausible because compensating objectively affected participants can protect operator trust and correct protocol-caused harm. However, the funding case is not yet clean enough for shared-capital approval as written: the analysis repository says 45 affected participants and 24,799.48 GONKA, while the executable governance messages show about 27,906.54 GNK across 50 recipient-like addresses. That mismatch is material for a payout proposal. The proposal also lacks a named accountable owner, conflict disclosures, dispute/appeal handling, and a post-execution reconciliation path.

Доказательства

средние

Команда

провал

Блокеры

3

Почему такое мнение

  • Plausible network-level restitution for a specific CPoC bug incident.
  • Material mismatch between analytical payout basis and executable transfer messages blocks confidence in recipient and amount correctness.
  • Accountability, conflict disclosure, dispute handling, and post-execution reporting are under-specified.

Пять публичных проверок

3/4

Ценность для сети

The proposal addresses a credible network-level restitution problem: participants affected by an abnormal CPoC event in epochs 132-133. Restitution for protocol-caused reward disruption can preserve fairness and trust. The weakness is that the imported governance text itself is very thin and does not explain the strategic rationale beyond the one-sentence payout purpose.

2/4

Ясность плана

The action is bounded to a compensation payout for epochs 132-133, and the repository claims reproducible analysis, eligibility criteria, affected participant lists, and compensation files. But the proposal lacks explicit acceptance criteria and the extracted evidence shows a material mismatch between the repository totals and executable messages. For a payout, recipient and amount correctness are the plan; those are not sufficiently reconciled here.

1/4

Доверие к команде

The only accountable party in the imported proposal is an on-chain proposer address. No named owner, entity, contact path, or post-payout accountability process is provided. The repository suggests analytical work was performed, but the record does not establish who is accountable for recipient correctness, dispute resolution, or reconciliation of the amount mismatch.

1/4

Дисциплина финансирования

For a payout profile, budget discipline means auditable formula, recipient set, total amount, and message safety. The repo states 24,799.48 GONKA for 45 affected participants, while the executable messages spend about 27,906.54 GNK and include 50 recipient-like addresses. Until that delta is explained or corrected, the payout amount and recipient set are not defensible enough.

1/4

Риски и stewardship

The proposal recognizes executable governance risk only generically, but does not provide conflict disclosures, appeals, exclusions, edge-case handling, or post-execution reconciliation. The governance vote outcome is context only and does not cure the transfer-safety and accountability gaps.

Оценка команды

Team confidence is low for this exact ask. There is an on-chain proposer address, but no named accountable owner, no explicit contact/reporting path, and no stated responsibility for reconciling disputes or errors in the payout table.

Ответственный

вопрос

A proposer address exists, but no named owner or entity is provided.

Релевантные доказательства

вопрос

The repository provides analytical materials, but the record does not prove the proposer/team has delivered a correct restitution payout before or explain the mismatch between analysis and executable messages.

Ресурсы и capacity

неясно

No time, resources, or commitment are stated for post-payout verification, appeals, or correction of errors.

Accountability path

провал

No reporting cadence, dispute channel, or escalation path is provided.

Условия

  • Publish a frozen compensation table mapping every recipient address to epoch, eligibility evidence, formula inputs, calculated amount, and executable message amount.
  • Reconcile the repository total of 24,799.48 GONKA / 45 affected participants with the executable total of about 27,906.54 GNK / 50 recipient-like addresses, or correct the executable messages.
  • Provide independent verification artifacts: data snapshot hashes, script commit hash, reproduction instructions, and a reviewer-signed reconciliation that the messages match the compensation table.

Блокирующие проблемы

  • Ключевые утверждения не подтверждены: The core payout claim is materially inconsistent across sources: the analysis repo states 45 affected participants and 24,799.48 GONKA, while executable messages show about 27,906.54 GNK and 50 recipient-like addresses. For a payout, this must be reconciled before support.
  • Нет ответственного owner: Only an on-chain proposer address is identified; no named owner is accountable for recipient correctness, dispute handling, or post-execution reconciliation.
  • Нет бюджетной или tranche-логики: Although a payout does not need project tranches, it does need a clean payout formula and recipient/amount mapping. The extracted sources do not show a reconciled executable amount, recipient table, or explanation of the delta.
Источники и доказательстваShow

governance 33

SUCCEEDED

https://gonkascan.com/network/proposals/33

Evidence used in the opinion

votkon/epoch-132-analysis

votkon/epoch-132-analysis: no description; 0 stars, 0 forks, 0 open issues; default branch main; license MIT; pushed 2026-03-26T14:32:31Z; README extracted (7714 chars); no workflow files detected; SECURITY.md not detected

https://github.com/votkon/epoch-132-analysis

Governance executable messages

8 executable messages; types: /inference.streamvesting.MsgBatchTransferWithVesting, /cosmos.distribution.v1beta1.MsgCommunityPoolSpend; actions: VESTING_PAYOUT, COMMUNITY_POOL_SPEND; funds: 27906543670502 ngonka; 50 recipient-like addresses

https://gonkascan.com/network/proposals/33

Gonkascan governance proposal

Canonical governance proposal source.

https://gonkascan.com/network/proposals/33

Governance final tally

status: PROPOSAL_STATUS_PASSED; yes 184243; no 0; abstain 256296; no-with-veto 0; leading: abstain; quorum 0.334000000000000000; threshold 0.500000000000000000; veto 0.334000000000000000

https://gonkascan.com/network/proposals/33