DFINITY Foundation

ICDevs.org

CryptoIsGood

Anvil

ICPL.app

ysyms

The Accumulators’ Neuron

RawTech Venture

Paul Young

ICPMANUAL

8yeargangDAO

Isaac Valadez

Krzysztof Żelazko

Nicolas.ic

Smaug’s Neuron for Retail Investors

ICLight.io

Taggr Network

Sonic AMM

Rakeoff.io

OpenChat

ELNA AI

GEEKFACTORY

ICP Hub México

ICP Hub Poland

Jerry Banfield

WaterNeuron

ICP Hub Bulgaria

Gold DAO

NeuronPool

LORIMER

B3Pay

ZenithCode

Aviate Labs

D-QUORUM

Yuku AI

CO.DELTA △

CodeGov

Cosmicrafts

Synapse.vote (original)

Synapse.vote (NEW)

Arthur’s Neuron (used to be cycle_dao)

Inactive (Request Removal) - The Fools' Court

$STACK

Always Rejects

John Wiegley

The Network Nervous System (NNS) requests the DFINITY Foundation Grants Committee to reconsider the automatic six-month extension of the current Voting-Neuron Grants and instead run a new, open election for each grant topic — Protocol Canister Management, IC OS Version Election, Participant Management & Node Admin, and Subnet & API BN Management — using the same public selection mechanics that were put forward in July 2024.

```
## Background & Current Situation
* **July 2024**: A six month *intermediate* grant programme was [announced](https://forum.dfinity.org/t/grants-for-voting-neurons/32721), to reward neurons that actively review and vote on critical proposal topics.  
* Grants for all four topics ultimately went to a single entity, **CodeGov**, largely through votes steered by the Synapse community. See all proposals [listed](https://forum.dfinity.org/t/grants-for-voting-neurons/32721/109), see [results](https://forum.dfinity.org/t/grants-for-voting-neurons/32721/141), and check [VPGeek](https://f2djv-5aaaa-aaaah-qdbea-cai.raw.icp0.io/) for inspection.
* The six-month term has now ended. Instead of re-running the election, the Foundation announced a unilateral **six-month extension**, postponing any opportunity for the community to reassess recipients or onboard new candidates.

---

## Why a New Election Is Needed

| Concern | Impact on the Network |
|---------|-----------------------|
| **Concentration of influence** – one individual controls grants funds for all four topic | Weakens decentralisation; introduces single-point risk |
| **Material changes since July 2024** – team/individual status shifts; review quality now measurable | Original votes no longer reflect current realities or proven performance |
| **New, ready candidates** - not offered a fair chance to take part | Exclusion stifles competition, expertise diversity, and engagement |
| **Healthy precedent** – periodic confirmation is now part of the long-term governance design | Consistency and appropriateness. A re-election falls squarely under this design |
| **Community expectation** – grants described as *“up to six months”* (implying follow-up confirmation) | Ignoring this erodes trust in governance outcomes and procedures |

---

## Proposed Election Process (details can be adjusted as required)

1. **Call for Applications (14 days)**  
   * Forum thread per topic; candidates provide neuron ID, team size, qualifications, review samples, and/or voting principles.  

2. **Community Review (7 days)**  
   * Open Q&A in the forum; candidates may amend their applications.  

3. **NNS Motion Proposals**  
   * One motion per **candidate × topic** (same format as July 2024).  
   * Voting window: **4 days**.  

4. **Selection Rule**  
   * For each topic, the two candidates with the highest **(YES − NO)** tally are elected.  

5. **Grant On-Ramp & Off-Ramp**  
   * Existing grantees submit a final monthly report for the overlap month.  
   * New grantees begin receiving funds the following month; reporting and evidence requirements remain unchanged.  

---

## Desired Outcome
* **Merit-based renewals** – current holders can keep grants if they still command broad support.  
* **Greater decentralisation** – another chance to encourage independent reviewers per topic.  
* **Higher review quality** – competition and accountability drive better proposal analysis, benefiting all neuron holders.
* **Transparent, repeatable cadence** – establishes the six-month review rhythm the community should expect.  

---

## Action Requested of Voters
**Vote YES**  
if you believe the NNS should honour the original six-month commitment and give the community a timely chance to reaffirm or change its grant representatives.

**Vote NO**  
if you prefer to accept the unilateral extension, carrying the pre-existing electees without challenge or community inspection.
```

New Election for Voting Neuron Grants