A few thoughts: a) Given the RFP structure is new, it seems prudent to start with lower amounts, maybe just one milestone instead of many. b) given the domain is "kusama.app," how does this align with the privacy/ZK initiative?, c) it seems maybe more suited to a normal treasury proposal rather than an RFP, because voters need to weigh in on whether or not this is what they want for the front page of Kusama.

We agree with the same line of reasoning as as W1ZSPR3.

Daniel reached me for an candidate implementor. I also agree with W1ZSPR3 about the concern of the kusama front page.

Seemingly useless proposal.

Fully support this Team managing the deployment of interfaces that will allow users to deploy their own DAOs.

While I like the idea of RFPs, I dislike how they've been implemented so far: why do we need curators again? Can't we post an RFP with a vision, deliverables etc. (include an appropriate commission for the RFP submitter based on the hours of work they've put into it) and set a deadline for teams to submit their projects and vote on them? I really dislike giving individual curators even more control on how treasury funds are spent.

This feels more like something the community should vote on via a regular treasury proposal, especially if it’s meant to shape kusama.app domain that could lead to confusion if not done correctly. Right now, there’s no clear picture of what’s being built. A visual mockup would go a long way, and honestly, with a solid roadmap and clear milestones, curators might not even be necessary. A smaller raise probably makes more sense with shorter milestones than raising $100k at project onset.

I like the idea well enough, but I am not convinced by the execution. I agree with William's previous approach.

This should be more of a standard treasury proposal. We agree with William here.