No decision deposit?

Questions:
From proposal:

Polkadot’s ecosystem consists of numerous parachains that operate independently but are connected through its Relay Chain, using cross-chain communication protocols such as XCMP. This polylithic design contrasts sharply with Crystal’s current system, which is optimized for monolithic blockchains—chains that operate as single ledgers with no cross-chain interoperability. Crystal’s architecture will need to be restructured to handle these interconnected parachains, supporting both intra-chain and cross-chain transactions.

In order to have full coverage of whats going on in the Polkadot ecosystem. You guys are writing that you will support:
Asset Hub
Bridge Hub
Moonbeam
HydraDX
Astar
Bittensor
BiFrost
Mythos
Origintrail
Hyperbridge

What made you guys select these and do you guys have plans to integrate more parachains? If you guys decide to integrate more parachains, will that cost be included in this proposal or will you guys come back for further funding?

Case Management & Incident response
Ongoing support from Crystal's Investigations Team. Up to 200 hours of blockchain intelligence, forensics, investigations. Rapid response to crimes, hacks, stolen funds, money laundering etc.
50,000.00

Who from the DOT community will this be applicable for? Does the Crystal team mean that they will do investigations based on stolen funds from the token holders. How will this work? In the web2 world its common practice to have a Incident Response team that reports to the customers on-call responsible person. Which cases will these 200hours go to? can every dot holder submit a request for you guys to track stolen funds or is it limited to treasury owned assets? Please elaborate.

Also wanted to point out that:

JAM (Just-in-time Asynchronous Messaging)

Jam does not stand for "Just In Time Asynchronous Messaging". I think you guys are confusing XCM with Jam(Joint Accumulate machine, read more here: https://graypaper.com/)

Dear @Crystal Intelligence,

Thank you for your proposal. Our vote on this proposal is NAY. Below is a summary of our members' comments:

This proposal raised concerns primarily about its high cost relative to the perceived value. There is a lack of a clear strategy and refinement, describing it as overly expensive for a client-list-style service.

The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.

Kind regards,
Permanence DAO