Regarding the proposal I am a bit ambiguous, a mistake like this can happen, no one really took a real loss but only less gain, also, as I reed somewhere else, most of the liquidity were DAO funds, so in part this is a refund to ourself.
The Bounty to NolanV is highly appreciated by me, not so much cause the discovery of the incident (which has been known by kpk before) but cause it showed the insufficient communication regarding this.
Looking at this timeline I ask myself what might have been the appropriate time to inform the broader public, at least Gnosis-DAO members. Although I check the balancer forum from time to time I missed this topic there.
Regarding DAO-funds managed by kpk I would prefer a place either her or at kpk site where these issues can be communicated in time. Ofc there might be reasons to withhold info from the public if it might increase harm due to further exploitation and it might also be a valid argument if it would harm some other projects (like gnosis pay). But in these cases it should be clearly emphasized afterwards what are the reasons for delayed communication at which point.
Regarding this case imho, at least at the time of the BAL proposal there should have been some info to the DAO community.
Maybe kpk could add a section for these kind of topics in their monthly reports?