see a review of LUCID from gotti, (not bounty related) - https://ethresear.ch/t/a-criticism-of-lucid-and-encryption-scheme-agnostic-encrypted-mempool-designs/25210 separately, appreciate the intent, but there's some nuance to unpack - the cost of core development is certainly more than a single (admirable!) bounty to comp core dev review bandwidth. there's the cost to come to consensus on the design tradeoffs among ~200 participants, costs to test and implement, and most significantly, the cost to maintain the feature in clients+spec in perpetuity (or until removed/superceded). we need structural solutions so we dont exclusively depend on altruism/voluntary donations - while definitely in need of resources, should core development be steered by who can pay for features? or the broader needs of the network and its users. not saying this still isn't happening in spirit, just extending to worst case scenarios(trent.eth)