I’m struggling a little to make this concrete for a vote.
I think vaca/waq concerns about the team spend being not-yet-defined are valid. I think ShfRyn’s uncertainty about GMC will be a lot better understood after 2-3 cycles vs the current 1 cycle. There’s also an argument to be made for voting on the component parts (fix split to intent going forward, fix historical splits, add to IMC split maybe with amount as part of vote), but obviously there’s a cost there in complexity.
I’m currently leaning to a single vote with:
- Correct split for future; add an extra 16% to IMC’s split
- This is 50% per the “diverted initial oDAO funds” metric Jasper was using; it’s aimed to be significant but conservative.
- Expense to make up for past periods being lower than intended
Splits, for context
- Current: Incentives (e.g., LP bonuses) - 27%, Grants and Bounties - 16%, Reserve Treasury - 57%
- “Intended”: Incentives (e.g., LP bonuses) - 34%, Grants and Bounties - 20.5%, Reserve Treasury - 45.5%
- Proposed: Incentives (e.g., LP bonuses) - 50%, Grants and Bounties - 20.5%, Reserve Treasury - 29.5%
I made a draft RPIP (and expense) for this - see the diff here.
I’ll give time here for a bit of commentary before putting up a sentiment poll. Note that we won’t go to snapshot until after RPIP-4 stuff is resolved.