Hey, I think you are aware of my opinion regarding bounties and how useful they can be to organise the community, so I think a proposal like this one is a bad move: if you, or whoever complains to you is unhappy with the way events bounty is managed, then propose a new set of curators who take over - maybe the ones who complain should organise themselves as curators and give it a try on management of events, or better yet: new curators who are experts in the scope of work of the bounty (+ change the mandate of the bounty slightly as well).

The bounty mechanism is a good way to budget treasury and organise a pipeline for the community to submit proposal on its scope of work. If we do not organise this in some way, we will have dozens of proposals per week for events on the treasury tracks. Back then, when we did not have events bounty we had up to 10-12 proposals a week asking for funding for events of different kinds: some were grifters/scammers, some were not - the community did not have time to check invoices, ask questions, check proof, and review them all to vote, making sure no delays happen with treasury spends, among other things: how do you suggest we fix this issue we already encountered in the past?

The result of closing a bounty that aims to organise the community around a scope of work like this one will be event proposals with no oversight, in any case.. so basically the same result as one of the problems you mention we have now with the bounty. I dont see the issue being solved by submitting a proposal to close the bounty.

Hello, I do not usually participate in open governance, but I am an active user in the community privately. But in this proposal I would like to leave my opinion: I agree with Giotto regarding the current bounty of events. Not to close it, maybe we can change the curator set for better ones. But what is clear is the inefficiency of the current curators. I am in contact with different people who have wanted to hold events in the event bounty with solid proposals and the curators have simply denied it. Furthermore, since the opening of bounty v2.0 the delays remain exactly the same and the curators are sometimes quite rude and offensive with their comments to event organizers who only want to contribute to the ecosystem with their proposals. Finally, I would like to comment that the curators do not guide the event organizers and they (the organizers) face a high level of pressure from the suppliers. Please the events HAVE TO been done in polkadot and we have lot of amazing and transparents teams that want to make it. We have to fix the problem in the event bounty and maybe let the event organizers go to open gov... that many times is more secure than eents bounty. To take another good example is Polkadot Savannah, that seen to be refuse. The team background is great and they prepared a well written proposal. Thanks you.