Supporting this proposal means you agree that, Kusama implements a "Polkadot-friendly JAM upgrade" with full standard configuration, designed for Polkadot to eventually join and share security costs.

Like Polkadot did with ref#682, it's time for Kusama to take a stance towards JAM. The problem is, the costs of running a full JAM instance are too high for Kusama's small economy, so we either run a smaller instance(optimized for new use cases with 1sec finality)((Opt.A)) or hope for Polkadot to agree to share the same instance to split the cost between the 2 economies.

Configuration

• Full JAM implementation (standard specs, can start smaller and scale)
• Multi-token economics supporting both KSM and DOT
• Shared security model with distributed infrastructure costs

Economics

• Problem: Kusama can't afford ~$60M/year for full JAM alone
• Solution: Share security burden between multiple token economies
• Benefit: Each network pays proportionally(to it's core allocation?)

Storage Token Considerations

To avoid KSM bias and attract Polkadot participation token holders can later decide:

• Option 1: DOT as storage deposit token
• Option 2: New neutral "JAM storage token"
• Option 3: KSM as storage deposit token, other economic arrangements negotiated later

Strategic Benefits

• Reduced costs through burden sharing
• Shared security and larger validator sets
• Cross-ecosystem interoperability from launch
• Template for future economies to join the same JAM instance

Key Challenge

Requires governance approval from both ecosystems and fair economic arrangements acceptable to both communities.

Vision

Creates precedent for multi-ecosystem JAM instances, positioning both networks as pioneers of shared security models in the JAM era.