# Argument-0007: Retention at Rank II

|                 |                      |
| --------------- | ---------------------|
| **Report Date** | 2025/11/01           |
| **Submitted by**| s0me0ne-unkn0wn      |


## Member details

- Current rank: II
- Polkadot address: 13WGadgNgqSjiGQvfhimw9pX26mvGdYQ6XgrjPANSEDRoGMt
- Date of initial induction: 2024/04/22
- Date of last report: 2025/07/26
- Area(s) of Expertise/Interest: WebAssembly, PolkaVM, PVF execution, throughput benchmarking

## Reporting period

- Start date: 2025/07/27
- End date: 2025/11/01

## Argument

I was busy working on [RFC-145](https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/RFCs/pull/145), polishing its implementation ([#8641](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/8641) and [#8866](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/8866)) and addressing review comments. By now, it's ready for review, and I encourage all fellows with host function-related expertise to review the work ASAP. We want this RFC implemented to improve execution determinism and performance.

I also published [RFC-156](https://github.com/polkadot-fellows/RFCs/pull/156), which proposes adding BLS12-381 host functions (the underlying logic was already implemented by @drskalman and @davxy). The functions are required to equip BEEFY with BLS signatures, which are essential for the accountable light client protocol. It is important to bundle RFC-156 with RFC-145 to set a consistent memory allocation strategy for new host functions.

Further, I supported the Spammening and throughput benchmarking related work and modified the YAP runtime to include the collator selection pallet ([#9663](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/9663)). While working on that, I discovered and fixed a critical bug in Aura consensus implementation ([#9753](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/9753))

Additionally, I'm keeping the [PolkaVM integration PR](https://github.com/paritytech/polkadot-sdk/pull/6704) up to date so it could be used as soon as RFC-145 is adopted.

To summarize, my work during the reporting period was valuable, and therefore, I'm applying for retention at Rank II.

## 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 referendum in which I was eligible to vote (i.e NaN% 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 NaN% voting agreement).  |  |
|III|70%   |100%  |   |  |
|IV |60%   |90%   |   |  |
|V  |50%   |80%   |   |  |
|VI |40%   |70%   |   |  |


## Misc

- [ ] Question(s): 

- [ ] Concern(s): 

- [ ] Comment(s):