I agree completely that these sponsorships can cause a conflict of interest, and I also agree with Alex promo team that this entire HA program is a whales' game that will not benefit Polkadot.

However, I will vote NAY because full disclosure was not part of the original referendum, and demanding it now seems unfair. Instead, such a requirement could be added for all future applicants.

amount

beneficiary

Cancelled

Submitted

DecisionStarted

DecisionDepositPlaced

small_tipper

WHO: The author of the message is requesting Head Ambassadors who have won their bid to disclose their sponsors.

WHAT: Disclosure of sponsors, including wallet addresses and transaction IDs.

PRICE/TIMEFRAME/RESOURCES: Not specified.

Full Disclosure for Head Ambassador Sponsorship - Whistle-Blower Series Part 1

root

whitelisted_caller

wish_for_change

staking_admin

treasurer

lease_admin

fellowship_admin

general_admin

auction_admin

referendum_canceller

referendum_killer

big_tipper

small_spender

medium_spender

big_spender

Origin able to dispatch a whitelisted call.

Origin for signaling that the network wishes for some change

Origin able to cancel slashes and manage minimum commission.

Origin for spending up to 10,000,000 DOT from the treasury as well as generally administering it.

Origin for managing the composition of the fellowship.

Origin able to spend around 250 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 1,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 10,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend around 100,000 DOT from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend up to 1,000,000 DOT from the treasury at once.