Increasing GMC Share of Inflation Vote

Governance
1

The DAO began discussing the GMC’s share of inflation here on December 31, 2024.

After community input, a poll was held on March 11 to determine the preferred inflation split, with Option A emerging as the favored choice.

Option A

  • IMC / Incentives (e.g., LP bonuses): 50%
  • GMC / Grants and Bounties: 25%
  • Reserve Treasury: 25%

Before a formal vote could proceed, a decision was needed regarding the ODAO’s share of inflation. With the successful passage of RPIP-68 on March 19, the governance process for committee splits can now move forward.

An RPIP draft is live and has been merged here.

The contract parameters after a successful on-chain vote would be:

_contractName: GMC-2025-05
_recipientAddress: 0x6efD08303F42EDb68F2D6464BCdCA0824e1C813a
_amountPerPeriod: 5574738115527619071956
_periodLength: 2419200
_startTime: 1744263339
_numPeriods: 9

Sentiment Poll

  • Support moving to on-chain vote; I think this proposal is great
  • Support moving to on-chain vote; I think this is good enough
  • Undecided; other
  • Undecided; I have a specific question I’d like clarified in the comments below
  • Oppose moving to on-chain vote; I have a specific issue I’m mentioning in the comments below
  • Oppose moving to on-chain vote; other
0 voters
2

Given the current RPL price and its impact on the strength of the treasury, the GMC has decided not to pursue an increase to the global committee stipend rate for the foreseeable future. Should this stance change, the committee will aim to communicate its new position with ample notice.

5 Likes
3

With the sentiment poll having been active for 10 days and RPIP-69 now in its ‘Final’ state, I plan to raise the on-chain proposal tomorrow. I’m giving notice here in case there are any last-minute objections or revisions.

1 Like
4

Proposal submitted:
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x92520105064b74f69315b2373668b853c9e6768e7d7de5c192a5b101ebe19e08

1 Like
5

Providing another check on the parameters.

node.rocketpool.net/vote provides the payload:

proposalTreasuryNewContract(
    GMC-2025-05,
    0x6efD08303F42EDb68F2D6464BCdCA0824e1C813a,
    5574738115527619071956,
    2419200,
    1744263339,
    9
)

And we can see what each of those components is by searching the function in the codebase real quick:
proposalTreasuryNewContract(string memory _contractName, address _recipientAddress, uint256 _amountPerPeriod, uint256 _periodLength, uint256 _startTime, uint256 _numPeriods)

Name is fine. Address is indeed the GMC multisig. We’ll come back to amount at the end cuz it has real thinking. Period length in seconds is correct at 28 days: 28*24*60*60. See below for start time. Num periods is in line with what’s desired for the current GMC selection cycle (up to 14 months after last one).

Start time has a little gotcha – we want that to be one period (28 days) before the first payout. That epoch time is April 10 at 5:35 GMT – that is indeed when the last period transition happened.

On to the amount. I use https://dune.com/queries/1264376 to get per-period inflation rate by dividing two rplAmts (I used feb/march as there was no inflation change between them). I also use it to get the starting rplAmt (I use the april 10th one which includes the inflation change already. Then we then want the average of the next 9 periods, and we want to adjust that by multiplying with 0.25 (the GMC share).

>>> latest = 21884.507624803523266610
>>> march = 22595.578546027106873451
>>> february = 22511.165722891375675992
>>> period_mult = march/february
>>> .25*(sum([latest*(period_mult**i) for i in range(1, 9+1)])/9)
5574.73811552762

An irrelevant 1 picoRPL difference, probably caused by my careless use of floats.
So – I’m happy, and will be voting For.

3 Likes