Thanks for sharing this, Noah! A few thoughts that crossed my mind when reading the proposal:

Are you following on the latest developments for the Treasury Bounty Extension for Kusama? Our main goal is to be able to budget and allocate portions of the treasury for what the Council deems as important developments on the network, while allowing to scale Council's tasks with Curators.

While this particular extension cannot be considered a bounty implementation in the sense of short-term, quick fixes bounties, it can certainly be used for this. I believe the vision is to add this implementation as part of Apps UI - reflecting the high goals for the Council at a particular time and allowing Curators to manage the bounty allocations from there.

That said, an integration of the Polkadot ecosystem with Gitcoin to manage bounties is somehow already in place, although with many deficiencies: I would expect this integration to go further into the ecosystem and to enable payments in KSM or other tokens according to the specific task (I'd like to see KSM payments first, to be able to use the functionality right away).

Given this, I would think the submission seems redundant in the sense that it tries to replace what already exists. The advantage of Gitcoin is that it attracts developers somehow outside the Polkadot ecosystem.

If we try to answer the question: "Is this submission beneficial for Kusama?" we could argue this is a replacement of what we have that in comparison could fall short when bringing a benefit if compared to other platforms. What I would like to see on this submission is: a UI that talks to Kusama and integrates what we are working on with the bounties extension, decentralized, and maybe even as a mobile app with metadata on IPFS to add value. This would, IMO, align with what we already have.

I know the requested amount is relatively low and I think some things could be added to the proposal to align it more with what we have. I would be happy to discuss this further and review a new budget for it if needed. Happy to hear your thoughts and other councillors opinion on this as well!

I see this proposal, in an ideal scenario, as potentially an opportunity to create a space where chains that have bounty-like features can interact/collaborate/compete over their shared goals, which is something I know that some people in Kusama Council are currently looking for the ability to do.

As Raul mentioned, currently our "bounty like features" are incoming in the "bounty extension to the treasury pallet", this is something that will likely go live in multiple chains that use the treasury pallet and as such already provides a pretty sound foundation to build a multichain platform on top of. As such I don't see any real value of aggregation of informal offchain commitments to bounties (this is what gitcoin does, and does well enough,) but I see plenty of value in linking onchain bounty commitments across chain (ie, if I proposed a bounty or am assigned as a Curator of a bounty on two separate chains, I should be able to combine discussions regarding those bounties into the same page/feed/etc. on some hypothetical aggregation platform.) - I would love to see tools to propose new onchain bounties, or propose supporting bounties on "foreign" chains, with the same curator, for goals that help more than one ecosystem.

What I would like to see on this submission is: a UI that talks to Kusama and integrates what we are working on with the bounties extension, decentralized, and maybe even as a mobile app with metadata on IPFS to add value.

this is also my position here - the way I could imagine this working is starting out with your existing bounty UI in sunshine, and extending it to support viewing, "proposing", and "curating" Bounties that exist in the upcoming Kusama Treasury "format". Then your "platform" will already support two onchain bounty formats, and at least a handful of chains (any chain with pallet-treasury that updates to a version with the bounty extension, and any chain with sunshine-bounty)

pallet-treasury bounties don't have any existing format for their description - it provides a similar reason/description field to what "tips" provides - so there's also an opportunity here to define a shared format (ipfs hash that points to some kind of structured data) between sunshine and pallet-treasury - this could plausibly also be extended to tips, I've always wanted to see people submitting rich content via the tip "reason".

Your existing proposal for funding is also within the scope of a tip and not a treasury proposal, to be entirely honest 😅 if you want to do what you specified in your proposal as is, I'd probably just recommend doing it and then asking for a tip afterwards - if increasing scope a little bit the way me and Raul are describing is interesting to you, you can probably ask for significantly more - don't just ask for 1/3 of the funds required for a single milestone of a project that doesn't add significant value to either your ecosystem or Kusama - fund your entire project and deliver something that works now and will continue working in the future, please!