An entity willing to create the scripts that will reward addresses that voted in proposals that requested DED within a time frame with a portion of the DED tokens available in the treasury. We are currently aiming for 6 months. An important note is that the payments will be only made in DED so no DOT, USDC/T can be requested for this job so that foreign tokens can be self-sustainable and don&rsquo;t depend on the liquidity of stablecoins, native DOT or even other tokens.
Interested parties please state your requested amount in DED and we will be in charge of creating the referenda.
This goes in line to the GaaS idea recently proposed by us on the Polkadot forum.
<a href="https://forum.polkadot.network/t/gaas-governance-as-a-service-oursourcing-governance-to-polkadots-opengov-a-master-plan-for-tokens-airdropped-to-the-polkadot-treasury-or-any-treasury/10169">https://forum.polkadot.network/t/gaas-governance-as-a-service-oursourcing-governance-to-polkadots-opengov-a-master-plan-for-tokens-airdropped-to-the-polkadot-treasury-or-any-treasury/10169</a>

WANTED! DED Votedrop.

It seems like this bounty doesn't have neither proactive activity nor reactive activity as there is only one child bounty granted.
<a href="../bounty/39">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/bounty/39</a>
<a href="../child_bounty/1445">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/child_bounty/1445</a>
This bounty was meant to be reactive to other external business development efforts but in 8 months it's had no activity. We would like to hear if there are parties interested in the funds of these bounty because as of now all active BD efforts don't depend on it as they are working in parallel and with more specific goals. Otherwise, we'd like to hear if there are grounds for closing this bounty due to inactivity and lack of impact on BD efforts. A poll is included on this discussion, Voting AYE means closing the bounty NAY, means leaving it active but more than anything, we would like to hear the reasons why this bounty should or shouldn't be closed.
Let's kickstart the discussion.

Closing Bounty 39. BD (Business Development) Bounty?

Currently this bounty has no activity and the last recorded activity was 9 months ago. It has only 3 child bounties recorded.
<a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/bounties/27" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/bounties/27</a>
<a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_745" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_745</a>
<a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_747">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_747</a>
<a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_746" target="_blank" rel="noopener">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_746</a>
206 days ago, curators became unassigned no further activity has been recorded since (i.e. Bounty was not extended and it has become curatorless).
<a href="https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/20889489-2">https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/20889489-2</a>
This bounty was meant to be reactive for all parachain teams looking to integrate their parachains into the Banxa on/off ramps but it's had no activity and the former curators and people spearheading this bounty are working on other efforts away from Polkadot. We would like to hear if there are parties interested in the integration proposed by this bounty as well as curators willing to take over this bounty which, as of now remains abandoned. Otherwise, we'd like to hear if there are grounds for closing this bounty due to inactivity and lack of impact on payment rails and on/off ramps. A poll is included on this discussion, Voting AYE means closing the bounty NAY, means leaving it active but more than anything, we would like to hear the reasons why this bounty should or shouldn't be closed.
Let's kickstart the discussion.

Closing Bounty 27. Polkadot Parachain Assets Onramp Bounty Program.

It seems like this bounty doesn't have neither proactive activity nor reactive activity as there is only one child bounty granted.
<a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/bounties/49">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/bounties/49</a>
<a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/49_2672">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/49_2672</a>
This bounty was meant to be proactive and reward developers envolved in BD pushes and other technical efforts but in 8 months it's had no activity. We would like to hear if there are parties interested in the funds of this bounty because as of now all active BD efforts don't depend on it as they are working in parallel and with more specific goals as well as geographically specific objectives. Otherwise, we'd like to hear if there are grounds for closing this bounty due to inactivity and lack of impact on BD efforts. A poll is included on this discussion, Voting AYE means closing the bounty NAY, means leaving it active but more than anything, we would like to hear the reasons why this bounty should or shouldn't be closed.
Let's kickstart the discussion.

Closing Bounty 49. Technical Support Bounty.

The discussion was kickstarted on December 15th 2024 with this discussion: https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2630

The main concern is the lack of activity and deliverables of this bounty. As expressed by the original discussion, this bounty was meant to be reactive to other external business development efforts seeking to integrate technical solutions but in 10 months it's had no activity and only 1 child bounty has been granted. 

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/49_2672

There were several comments pointing out that this bounty could be useful for certain support activities but we have not seen any initiative to move in any direction.

The remark on the bounty extension on 2024-10-02 (4 months ago) was “We have been setting up the bounty's operation. In the next bounty period, we expect an start increase in activity.”

https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/22797894-3

A second extension occurred on 2024-12-18 around the same time the discussion about closing the bounty occurred. No on-chain activity other than that has been recorded.

https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/23893006-2

Saxemberg will be voting in favor of the closure of bounty 49 as BD on Polkadot is composed of different DF, BD, dApp teams with a diverse set of skills, goals, locations/geographies and activities so each effort has sought their own solutions for technical integrations, usually independently and on their own conditions without having interact with this bounty. 

Given that during the discussion period there were some voices that mentioned some solutions, we waited and postponed this referendum for last to see if there was any initiative with respect to any of the previously mentioned solutions but neither a new solution initiative, change or child bounty was initiated so we understand that the current status quo of the bounty will remain.

Currently this bounty has no activity and the last recorded activity was 9 months ago. It has only 3 child bounties recorded.

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/bounties/27

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_745

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_747

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/child-bounties/27_746

223 days ago, curators became unassigned no further activity has been recorded since (i.e. Bounty was not extended and it has become curatorless).

https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/20889489-2

This bounty was meant to be reactive for all parachain teams looking to integrate their parachains into the Banxa on/off ramps but it's had no activity and the former curators and people spearheading this bounty are working on other efforts away from Polkadot. We found no parties interested in the integration proposed by this bounty as well as curators willing to take over this bounty during the discussion phase which, as of now remains abandoned. We consider there are grounds for closing this bounty due to inactivity and lack of impact on payment rails and on/off ramps. 

We have reached to the original proposer on X without reply. So now we submit this referendum to OpenGov to decide the future of Bounty 27.

This referendum follows the discussion on Polkassembly at: https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2629

and the socialization on X on our account:
https://x.com/saxemberg/status/1869020723026821326

Closing Bounty 27. Polkadot Parachain Assets Onramp Bounty Program

The discussion was kickstarted on October 9th with this discussion: <a href="../post/2503">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2503</a> and seeks to close the BD bounty - bounty 39 due to inaction and lack of structure and planning. <a href="https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/bounties/39">https://polkadot.subsquare.io/treasury/bounties/39</a>
The main concern is the lack of activity and deliverables of this bounty. As expressed by the original discussion, this bounty was meant to be reactive to other external business development efforts but in 8 months it's had no activity.
Important comments like Ingo Rube an original member of the bounty suggesting that the bounty should be closed as it meant to be retroactive and high quality. Alternatives proposed by him were: centralized coordination from the W3F or bringing up teams with +2M USD deals closed i.e a heavy track record in order to reconsider such bounty again. <a href="../post/2503#q8Js8RZhd8npmgNsQJlN">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2503#q8Js8RZhd8npmgNsQJlN</a>
The rest of the comments focused mostly on the lack of activity and focus as the main reason for why this bounty should be closed, concerns we also share with respect with this bounty.
There is a counterparty referendum that is live concurrently that seeks to redesign the BD bounty with <a href="https://x.com/crisnguyen99">https://x.com/crisnguyen99</a> at the helm. We planned with to launch both referenda concurrently so that the closing bounty referenda would have a somewhat viable alternative.
The counterproposal seeks to change curators to: Vincent Chan, Cris Nguỵen, Thibault Perr&eacute;ard, Zachary &ldquo;Yung Beef&rdquo; Edwards, Albert Burgos, Technical Support: Luca Poggi. The link to the full counterproposal discussion with title: &ldquo;Propose to revamp Polkadot BD Bounty with New Curator Set and Structure&rdquo; <a href="../post/2559">https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/post/2559</a> Link to the referendum soon.
Link to the full counterparty proposal: <a href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gRc-jOHnNr646_9cXG8qZyz-jCmcCAh-lXwoXWDRvqY/edit?tab=t.0">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1gRc-jOHnNr646_9cXG8qZyz-jCmcCAh-lXwoXWDRvqY/edit?tab=t.0</a>
Saxemberg will be voting in favor of the closure of bounty 39 and against the counterproposal as we hold the view that BD is not well suited for such a bounty in the present and proposed conditions conditions and further work and deliveries have to be considered first.
A second point is that BD on Polkadot seems unfit to be managed by a single team as different DF, BD, dApp teams have a diverse set of skills, goals, locations/geographies and activities so a unification in this sense doesn&rsquo;t make sense at present.
Past efforts have had a variety degrees of success and the current alternative (counterproposal) doesn't guarantee a high degree of deliveries either.
&nbsp;
EDIT Nov 26th 2024.
<a href="https://x.com/saxemberg/status/1861025419140485318">https://x.com/saxemberg/status/1861025419140485318</a>
According to Cris Nguyen, they won't be pursuing a counterproposal that seeks to change curators and revisit B39. Instead they will attempt to create a new Business Development bounty sometime the future. Make sure to vote in that one too. Hopefully when that happens, referendum 1297 sets a precedent for BD operations and bounties.
&nbsp;