ambassador

senior_ambassador

head_ambassador

PRs that just decrease the logging levels should not be mentioned in your retention. There is not really that much work attached to these kind of prs.

atRank

Deciding

Submitted

DecisionStarted

DecisionDepositPlaced

retain_at_ii_dan

Retain tdimitrov at rank 2

# Argument-0008: Retention at Rank 2

|                  |                                 |
| ---------------- | ------------------------------- |
| **Report Date**  | Date of submission (2026/05/12) |
| **Submitted by** | Tsvetomir Dimitrov              |

## Member details

- Matrix username: @tsvetomir:parity.io
- Polkadot address: 1QhVP5qzR2LfXqP77N1JcuwHoY7NH8JVRNFm1hSooE9d4pR
- Current rank: 2
- Date of initial induction: 2023/10/11
- Date of last report: 2026/02/25
- Area(s) of Expertise/Interest: Disputes, Collator protocol

## Reporting period

- Start date: 2025/12/08
- End date: 2026/02/25

## Argument

During this reporting period, my primary focus was still the collator protocol revamp and the
malus-collator (testing tool for the revamp).

I have fixed a few collator revamp related issues discovered during audits and testing:

- Each validator has got a limited number of peer scores it can track. When this limit is reached
  some peers need to be pruned from the database in order to keep it in a reasonable size. The initial
  implementation of pruning gave edge to new peers because it used only the timestamp of the last bump
  when evicting peers to the DB. As a result, a high score collator which was inactive for a while can
  easily be evicted by new peers with minimal score. To fix this a the ratio of
  `calculate score / time_since_last_bump` is calculated for each peer and the one with minimal score
  is evicted from the DB. The change is implemented in
  [polkadot-sdk pr-11576](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/11576).
- When starting the node with a warp sync and we hit a period near the `WARP_SYNC_TARGET_BLOCK`
  (each 512 blocks) we might not be able to call a runtime apis for some blocks, which will yield an
  error in the collator protocol revamp. To prevent the subsystem from exiting these errors aren't
  bubbled up anymore. Implemented in
  [polkadot-sdk pr-11496](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/11496).
- Decrease the log level of some noisy logs -
  [polkadot-sdk pr-11417](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/11417).
- Sync the values of `CONNECTED_PEERS_PARA_LIMIT` in experimental collator protocol and
  `MAX_AUTHORITY_INCOMING_STREAMS` in peer_set. Implemented in
  [polkadot-sdk pr-11762](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/11762).
- Simpler advertisement fetching mechanism.
  [polkadot-sdk pr-11008](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/11008)

In malus-collator the most notable improvement is the implementation of the automatic targets
discovery. Initially the malus-collator required a list of peer ids of its target. With this change
it supports automatic discovery of the validators of a given para plus tracking them on session
changes. I can't provide a link to the PR since the project is not open sourced yet.

## Voting record

| Ranks | Activity thresholds | Agreement thresholds | Member's voting activities                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      | Comments                                                                    |
| ----- | ------------------- | -------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| I     | 90%                 | N/A                  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                                             |
| II    | 80%                 | N/A                  | I have voted on 0 out of 0 referenda in which I was eligible to vote (i.e 100 % voting activity). Out of 0 referenda in which members of higher ranks were in complete agreement, I have voted in line with the consensus 0 times (i.e 100 % voting agreement). | There were no referendas I could participate in during the reporting period |
| III   | 70%                 | 100%                 |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                                             |
| IV    | 60%                 | 90%                  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                                             |
| V     | 50%                 | 80%                  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                                             |
| VI    | 40%                 | 70%                  |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |                                                                             |

## Misc

- [ ] Question(s):

- [ ] Concern(s):

- [ ] Comment(s):

Argument-0008: Retention at Rank 2

members

proficient_members

fellows

architects

architects_adept

grand_architects

masters

masters_constant

grand_masters

retain_at_i_dan

retain_at_iii_dan

retain_at_iv_dan

retain_at_v_dan

retain_at_vi_dan

promote_to_i_dan

promote_to_ii_dan

promote_to_iii_dan

promote_to_iv_dan

promote_to_v_dan

promote_to_vi_dan

fast_promote_to_i_dan

fast_promote_to_ii_dan

fast_promote_to_iii_dan

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 1 or above; `Success` is 1. Aka the "voice" of all Members.

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 2 or above; `Success` is 2. Aka the "voice" of members at least II Dan

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 3 or above; `Success` is 3. Aka the "voice" of all Fellows

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 4 or above; `Success` is 4. Aka the "voice" of members at least IV Dan

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 5 or above; `Success` is 5. Aka the "voice" of members at least V Dan

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 6 or above; `Success` is 6. Aka the "voice" of members at least VI Dan

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 7 or above; `Success` is 7. Aka the "voice" of all Masters

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 8 or above; `Success` is 8. Aka the "voice" of members at least VIII Dan

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 9 or above; `Success` is 9. Aka the "voice" of members at least IX Dan

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 3 or above when voting on a fortnight-long track; `Success` is 1

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 4 or above when voting on a fortnight-long track; `Success` is 2

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 5 or above when voting on a fortnight-long track; `Success` is 3

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 6 or above when voting on a fortnight-long track; `Success` is 4

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 7 or above when voting on a fortnight-long track; `Success` is 5

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 8 or above when voting on a fortnight-long track; `Success` is 6

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 3 or above when voting on a month-long track; `Success` is 1

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 4 or above when voting on a month-long track; `Success` is 2

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 5 or above when voting on a month-long track; `Success` is 3

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 6 or above when voting on a month-long track; `Success` is 4

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 7 or above when voting on a month-long track; `Success` is 5

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 8 or above when voting on a month-long track; `Success` is 6

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 3 or above when voting on a 30 day long track; `Success` is 1.

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 4 or above when voting on a 30 day long track; `Success` is 2.

Origin aggregated through weighted votes of those with rank 5 or above when voting on a 30 day long track; `Success` is 3.


Report Date	Date of submission (2026/05/12)
Submitted by	Tsvetomir Dimitrov

Ranks	Activity thresholds	Agreement thresholds	Member's voting activities	Comments
I	90%	N/A
II	80%	N/A	I have voted on 0 out of 0 referenda in which I was eligible to vote (i.e 100 % voting activity). Out of 0 referenda in which members of higher ranks were in complete agreement, I have voted in line with the consensus 0 times (i.e 100 % voting agreement).	There were no referendas I could participate in during the reporting period
III	70%	100%
IV	60%	90%
V	50%	80%
VI	40%	70%