Thanks for posting this for discussion.

A few comments:

• The requested allocation is 3000 DOTs: I would like to see more granularity on milestones, including the tasks to be developed on each of them (taking into account the costs for the tasks). Something that might work for clarity is to include a budget, listing each milestone with tasks and cost, and including the costs of the remote server you are planning to use and why this choice.
• Additionally, I would like a spec of what specific information the two websites will contain and if the game centre website will include a web3 integration to interact with the chain. If yes, then how are you planning to implement this? - ideally some of it (your website, documentation drafts) could already be completed before receiving the allocation.
• I'd like to see milestone 2 and 3 (pallet specifications and development) as a priority before frontend work: if the chain design is not usable then you will have a complete frontend work developed that will be unused (the Council expects to fund usable projects).
• On milestones 2 and 3, please add which changes you need to make to the modules in order to work for your purpose, if any, and list the tasks to achieve these changes.
• What is the design on the governance side? how do you plan to implement the flow on the if a team wishes to add a new game to your chain? which collectives are to be added here and how do they interact?
• Can you explain in the proposal how a game will look like and what are the requisites this should fulfil to be included in future chain upgrades? do you have a process in place for this type of review?
• you mention the creation of a token for the chain: could you explain the economics of it in the proposal to understand better how the chain might become self-sustainable in the future? and furthermore, do you have a plan to become a parachain in the future? if yes, how does this plan look like? and if this does not work, do you have a plan B?
• how do you plan to use randomness in the chain?
• I dont think part of the allocation should be destined to future investment research.

I understand a lot of the info I am asking might be on the grant proposal you submitted to W3F (here), if this is the case, it would be great to understand the status of the proposal before moving forward with this, and it would be good if you could add the information requested on the comments above to the proposal published here.

In general, it has been a wider discussion if the treasury should fund rent-seeking projects that have a token: I would like to understand better the position of council members here to move forward with the proposal. PoC stage projects could be potentially funded in its early days by the treasury as long as they fulfil some conditions (its beneficial to the network as a whole, open source, others can use the code if needed) and there is some kind of swap with the treasury for rent-seeking projects.

Hexplay team, Thank you for the proposal! A few questions: 1) Why do "players exchange Dot for the HexPlay native token HPT to play the game."? Where does that DOT go? 2) I agree with RTTI that we should understand the status of the Web3 Foundation grant before moving forward with this proposal. 3) What is the benefit of this proposal to DOT holders specifically? Overall feedback is I'd focus on building really good Substrate modules and leave out the full blown parachain plan for now.