---
# System prepended metadata

title: Protofire Response

---

# Protofire Response

Dear Protofire team,
we had a thorough discussion in the council regarding Milestones 2 and 3 and came to the conclusion that we will not continue with the proposal after paying out the first milestone. 


There two main reasons for this:
1. A community member has built a very similar application with more functionality and with security integrated already. In our opinion, it is clear and non-negotiable that a recipe application should have basic security. In no circumstance should it be possible to login with any unowned DID. To put this into perspective: If the DID was a blockchain account with balance, you could spend unowned funds...
2. The council members which were involved in the development process were unhappy with the quality of the work and the communication: 
    a. Even though "QA" is part of every milestone, it did not seem like the app was tested even by the developer. We compiled at least 3 pages of obvious bugs. It is not part of the council's job to do QA, theoretically we just have to approve or disapprove until the majority of the council is satisfied. For us, this does not meet expectations and standard on the first milestone.
    b. Overall, just getting close to the finish line of the first milestone was very time consuming ddue to the low quality. That is not the purpose of Treasury proposals.
    
We are sorry that you already worked on features for Milestone 2 but we want to emphasize that this is a risk you took on your own. The reason of splitting such a proposal into multiple milestones is exactly that there is no guarantee to go along with all milestones. As explained numerous times, KILT is a decentralised protocol. It does not act as a company. It has a council to act as a tool for the growth and betterment of the chain.


We will approve Milestone 1 and would not approve Milestone 2 at this point. Of course, you can still continue your work on it and open a Treasury proposal. However, at this point, it would likely be disapproved. Unless significant changes are met and standards are raised to meet the expectations of the KILT protocol quality. The efforts and handling of the second milestones must be done async via the polkassembly discussion.

Sincerely,
William on behalf of the KILT Spiritnet council 


