Notice: Polkadot has migrated to AssetHub. Balances, data, referenda, and other on-chain activity has moved to AssetHub.Learn more
Close the Games Bounty and Return Remaining Funds to the Treasury
This referendum proposes to formally close the Games Bounty (Bounty #38) and return the remaining ≈ 34,000 DOT to the Polkadot Treasury.
The Games Bounty was originally established to support the growth of the gaming ecosystem on Polkadot, with the goal of incentivizing and rewarding independent developers to build games and infrastructure on the network.
Upon request of the curators, we are issuing this Referendum to close the bounty as it winds down its operations. This action will automatically unassign the curators and return all allocated funds to the Treasury.
We expect a final report by the curators and further information regarding the bounty's activities to be included as a comment.
Comments (9)
It's sad that both versions of the Games Bounty have been evaluating the edges of curation ... were the first try was managed by 30+ curators making it very slow and unable to decide and allocate funds, and the second was somehow a one-(wo)man curator show spending in everything except "independent developers to build games and infrastructure on the network" ... maybe something in between would have worked, we will never know.
@cedric.AAA🦊| ajuna.io Hey Cedric! But we're (PolkadotAvatars) independent developers who build games and infrastructure on the network, and we're still here if anything. We continue our work.
I served as curator for Game Bounty version 1.0, which unfortunately did not achieve the outcomes we had hoped for.
I closely followed Game Bounty 2.0 as an observer, noting that very little ultimately came to fruition. Lately, I’ve heard that the bounty generates revenue for Polkadot. While I support the decision to conclude the initiative, I would appreciate greater clarity on whether the anticipated revenue has in fact been realized, whether it is expected to continue, or whether, like other past commitments, it remained aspirational rather than actual. Thank you.