Referendum #50 · whitelisted caller · fact-checked

Second rejected attempt to add one validator slot

No original public title was captured.

Governance: Rejected · Not executed

Submitted 2025-04-07T14:07:48.000Z · 2025-04-21T15:09:33.001Z

Verification date in this record: 2026-10-14. This is not a live chain status check.

What this referendum means

What was proposed?

This was the second rejected attempt to add one slot to Vara's configured validator count.

Why it mattered

Keeping the failed attempts visible explains why the same validator-count proposal appears repeatedly and prevents the eventual successful change from being mistaken for four separate increases.

An Aye vote meant…

An Aye vote supported increasing the configured validator count by one.

A Nay vote meant…

A Nay vote opposed increasing the configured validator count through this referendum.

What happened or is happening

Referenda #49, #50, #51 and #52 share proposal hash 0x58fb35e67cf17648a4e963d61d77e49292ce62099080a67a9ada90fa7dd3945b. The decoded call is staking.increaseValidatorCount(1); only #52 executed it successfully.

No validator-count change was executed because the referendum was rejected.

If approved, increase Staking.ValidatorCount by one.

No off-chain action was authorized.

Promised outcomes

Increase Vara's configured validator count by one if approved.

Verified outcomes

The referendum was rejected and no call was executed.

Follow-up: verified-complete

The identical call was eventually executed through referendum #52.

Still unknown

The archive does not establish why the proposal was resubmitted under multiple tracks or timings beyond the visible referendum records.

Further explanation and reporting

No additional reporting has been published for this referendum.

Details and evidence

Participation

Calculation status: complete. Address-level figures are not counts of distinct people or organizations.

Individual vote rows reconcile to the aggregate capital total. Concentration treats delegated capital as controlled by the account casting the direct vote.

Direct addresses	3
Delegating addresses	0
Raw capital (VARA)	131241.060870117584
Weighted Aye power (VARA)	13124.106087011758
Weighted Nay power (VARA)	0
Approval (%)	100
Raw capital / captured electorate (%)	0.00131241
Support capital (VARA)	131241.060870117584
Top-one share (%)	80.00545
Top-three share (%)	100
HHI (0–10,000)	6771.34513
Gini (0–1)	0.52828994

Proposal history

Referendum	Governance	Execution	Direct addresses
#49 First rejected attempt to add one validator slot This was the first rejected attempt to add one slot to Vara's configured validator count.	Rejected	Not executed	5
#51 Rejected first attempt to add one validator slot This proposal would have added one active-validator slot, but it was rejected before the identical call passed as referendum #52.	Rejected	Not executed	2
#52 Increase Vara's validator count from 58 to 59 This referendum increased Vara's configured validator count by 1, from 58 to 59.	Executed	Dispatch succeeded	11

Timeline

Submitted · 2025-04-07T14:07:48.000Z · block 21451346
DecisionDepositPlaced · 2025-04-07T14:08:45.000Z · block 21451365
DecisionStarted · 2025-04-07T14:37:48.001Z · block 21451946
Rejected · 2025-04-21T15:09:33.001Z · block 21855146

Technical call tree

{
  "call": {
    "callIndex": "0x1503",
    "section": "whitelist",
    "method": "dispatchWhitelistedCallWithPreimage",
    "args": [
      {
        "name": "call",
        "type": "Call",
        "value": {
          "callIndex": "0x0d0a",
          "section": "staking",
          "method": "increaseValidatorCount",
          "args": [
            {
              "name": "additional",
              "type": "Compact<u32>",
              "value": 1
            }
          ]
        }
      }
    ]
  },
  "nestedCalls": [
    {
      "depth": 0,
      "callIndex": "0x1503",
      "section": "whitelist",
      "method": "dispatchWhitelistedCallWithPreimage"
    },
    {
      "depth": 1,
      "callIndex": "0x0d0a",
      "section": "staking",
      "method": "increaseValidatorCount"
    }
  ],
  "limitations": []
}

Historical track parameters

{
  "maxDeciding": 100,
  "preparePeriodBlocks": 600,
  "decisionPeriodBlocks": 403200,
  "confirmationPeriodBlocks": 200,
  "minimumEnactmentBlocks": 200,
  "decisionDeposit": {
    "planck": "100000000000000000",
    "vara": "100000"
  },
  "approvalCurve": {
    "reciprocal": {
      "factor": 270899180,
      "xOffset": 389830523,
      "yOffset": 305084738
    }
  },
  "supportCurve": {
    "reciprocal": {
      "factor": 8650766,
      "xOffset": 18867926,
      "yOffset": 41509433
    }
  }
}

Deposits

Governance deposits are not proposal spending.

{
  "submission": {
    "depositor": "kGgQqLXhVVMv85XDy1v5AE6HVBG1tkAwURrdmq1ewbmGMCaGH",
    "amount": {
      "planck": "100000000000000",
      "vara": "100"
    }
  },
  "decision": {
    "depositor": "kGhAjUA3Uke6UmWwMRRwFHuxisCgm7dab61sL1tKqA15NXQVX",
    "amount": {
      "planck": "100000000000000000",
      "vara": "100000"
    }
  },
  "outcome": "unknown"
}

Sources

subsquare · retrieved 2026-10-14T00:46:33.897Z · block 21451346
Public server-rendered page data captured before editorial translation.
subsquare · retrieved 2026-10-14T00:56:36.175Z
Public final vote rows used for voter counts, conviction values, delegation aggregates, and concentration calculations.
subsquare · retrieved 2026-10-14T18:25:38.101Z
Named referendum #51 used the same proposal hash 0x58fb35e67cf17648a4e963d61d77e49292ce62099080a67a9ada90fa7dd3945b and described it as adding one active validator slot.

Corrections

No corrections recorded.

Learn the terms

OpenGov · Referendum · Proposal · Preimage · Proposal hash · Runtime call