Close bounty 33

Easy Aye. I am not against marketing. I think it needs to be more transparent and it needs to be revamped with common sense marketing. Right now, that doesn't seem to be the case.

I fully agree, let's boycott Giotto.

Voted Aye. Makes sense to take a pause and to reflect on what worked and what didnt and to identify some improvements before moving ahead :)

We would like to raise a flag for all unstructured and blue sky bounties due to the risk that they entail. Our main concerns for bounty 33 are well documented.

Former issues:
Referendum 596 A warning about KOLs and other issues.
https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/596#BitglLTJHcnDH3etNCCN
Referendum 692
Request for structure and budgeting. Summary of all previous issues.
https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/692#JVcDPOD8Z5aOQnZLlp20
Referendum 822
Our last warning about KOLs
https://polkadot.polkassembly.io/referenda/822#zDO47tl2nN04z7tvAyqz
Referendum 834
Reintroduction of already denied terms.
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/834#1

We have tried at the very least to structure the bounty and to create a budget and to increase quality. These terms were not sought which makes us doubt about future promises.

In addition we want to bring up a very concerning issue regarding the inclusion of Ardizor (group) into the marketing bounty:

The identified parties so far:
https://x.com/WazzCrypto/status/1808151708435959996

Proof of interconnection
https://x.com/WazzCrypto/status/1748526698344464591

$BALLZ and $HULVIN Rug and related content and amplification
https://x.com/WazzCrypto/status/1797271738847232430
https://x.com/somaxbt/status/1767140393693413794

Additional involvement with the $ANALOS rug
https://x.com/search?q=%24ANALOS+Ardizor

Involved parties
https://x.com/WazzCrypto/status/1797269978304876927
ZachXBT also comments in this one

Proof of drainer by the same party
https://x.com/iins_omnia/status/1711090369461453056
https://x.com/CC2Ventures/status/1711097344681259382

Proof of connection by sharing referral links
https://x.com/gtx360ti/status/1751915242744164377

ZachXBT linking accounts
https://x.com/zachxbt/status/1779282615398240280

As we can see, Ardizor and connected parties, not only are a low quality KOL but also malicious because there are proof of drainers and rugpulls directly linked to this group of influencers (or possibly single entity).
This only shows the lack of oversight by both the talent agencies and the curators both showing a disconnection of the current events in crypto as well as lack of oversight over malicious entities. It also makes us doubt the due diligence made by the agencies with regards to malicious actors. We would like to invite token holders to watch the agencies reply to the Ardizor issue.

https://youtu.be/K38dccT2jBc?t=1913

For all the reasons we have outlined in the past and the current Ardizor issue and response towards it we are voting in favor of closing this bounty.
We would be in favor of marketing with better oversight, increased quality of talent and projects, well defined budget and ideally interconnected with current business development efforts. Until then, we will oppose all operations of this bounty in its current form.
Also, hopefully a more professional approach and not a reactionary one like:
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/946
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/937
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/834

Allegations of “closing the bounty will stop marketing” can always be met with new, independent and specific marketing related referenda.

Given that Ardizor and connected parties will likely target us for this publication, we will increase our OPSEC in order to avoid malicious attacks from this party such as drainers, spam and so on. So no calls or interactions to “meet Ardizor and have a chat with them” please. All them will be denied. Due to the delicate topic surrounding this we will maintain all communications related to this bounty public.

EDIT 1:
A live example of an internally amplified spam reply right on our X account
https://x.com/milenasantos_22/status/1809913053682515982 (120 likes on our X governance post https://x.com/saxemberg/status/1809782684249448648)

EDIT 2:
Further proof of dubious practices
https://x.com/WazzCrypto/status/1815733759209042364
Seemingly artificial and non-organic token distribution and exact same script distribution.
https://x.com/WazzCrypto/status/1815507355855130881

Certainly, closing this Bounty would be a mistake.
We are currently on the brink of a Bull market, and these types of activities are strictly necessary.
This does not mean that I agree with everything that happens in this or any other Bounty; there will always be anomalies or issues that can be improved.
It would be interesting if, instead of requesting the closure of a Bounty, regardless of which one, constructive ideas were provided to the curators to improve and address the shortcomings that the Bounty may have.

That is why I have decided to vote Nay for the closure of this Bounty.