@Stake Plus/CL thank you for voting.

There is no issue with PAL, it is very well fulfilling its purposes of co-funding Polkadot audits (15 and counting).

This proposal aims to address a different need which is creating a framework with incentives that will help onboard security researchers into Polkadot.

At the current stage, there is no consensus on what the role of Head Ambassadors should be, or what exactly the contributions of Ambassadors should constitute of. Given that we have 21 positions open, my opinion is that the new Ambassadors Program should kick off with people from diverse backgrounds.

Creating new collectives for specific verticals may very well be the outcome which some HAs reach after the details of the programme have been defined. I agree that this should be encouraged in cases where it makes sense (eg divergence in salaries). However, I think at this stage it is premature to be excluding tech contributions from the scope of the Ambassadors program

@saxemberg

To address your questions:

• I can dedicate 0.6+ FTE for this function, there is no company or team besides me
• The contributors will be onboarded from all regions. The web3 space is small, I am well connected to several communities of security researchers, and I attend some of the main web3 security events
• there is strong interest to contribute to Polkadot, at PAL we have already onboarded 12+ auditing companies or platforms. An important effort will be to decentralize it more by onboarding individual security researchers and incentivizing them to get involved and make useful contributions