tl;dr: Our Bot Developer Prop House round didn't reach submission quorum, so I am proposing we return the funds to the treasury

Longer version: Proposal 26 (Bot Developer Prop House) passed with 21 FOR votes and 0 AGAINST votes.

This result was based on momentum from a high engagement cast where I suggested (based on Andrei's observation) that we should take advantage of the momentum from Twitter's new ToS to attract bot developers to Farcaster.

Ultimately, the Prop had more community support than developer support, only garnering 3 submissions. This raises questions about what to do next:

• Should we distribute 1 ETH to all three developers?
• Should we distribute the complete 5 ETH between the three developers?
• What do the votes even mean if all of them are guaranteed to win.

The voting is intended to be an implicit filter mechanism, and it assumes there are more applicants than winners. Rather than award ETH to all of the developers who applied, I think we should take this as a sign of a lack of traction for the idea and return the $ to the treasury.

In the future, we should consider alternate funding mechanisms to encourage developer to move to Farcaster, including a smaller bounty program for members.

If passed, this Proposal will execute a self-txn, sending 0.01 ETH from the treasury to the treasury. More importantly, it will indicate to signers of the Small Grants multisig that they should return the 5 ETH rather than making a judgement call about how to split up the funds for the 3 developers who applied.

To the developers who applied: thank you for taking the time. This is not an indictment of your proposal or the quality of your work, and I encourage you to submit for a future retroactive funding round if you do decide to continue the migration.