Name of Retrospective Award
Tokenomics Rework Retro
Who is the proposed retrospective award recipient?
The community members that have spent a significant effort working on overhauling Rocket Pool’s tokenomics.
I am submitting three applications this period:
- Tokenomics Rework Retro
- Tokenomics Rework Grant (Core Contributors)
- Tokenomics Grant (Other Contributors)
What specific project or work is the retrospective award in recognition of? Please detail what the project or work entailed and the duration over which it took place.
Rocket Pool’s tokenomics is in a state of turmoil. Community members have diligently spent hours researching and designing new systems to fix Rocket Pool’s core problems including RP’s node operator constraints.
Valdorff’s response for not submitting a retrospective application yet was:
I plan to submit later because I don’t want to put in the time to think it through now, not because I think that’s better.
There has been increasing talk from the community about rewarding these efforts, and to incentivize others to contribute to the work.
By compensating for the progress up until this point, the GMC can acknowledge the months of hard work contributed and resignal to the DAO that tokenomics is top priority.
Links
- Discord thread
- rpl.rehab
- “Denver Lift Off” event by Valdorff and Samus
- Sheet containing notes, feedback, and TODOs
Contributors by message count (all time) from the following threads: Top (Tokenomics - RPL Issuance, Options draft, Bonds/MEV, Tokenomics - UARS, Tokenomics RPIPs (overall), Tokenomics - Surplus Revenue, Tokenomics - LP Deposits)
- Val: 3974
- samus: 3324
- Epineph: 1210
- sckuzzle: 1015
- knoshua: 721
- LongForWisdom: 194
- ramana: 139
- NeverAnIsland: 128
- yokem55: 125
- Ken: 107
Benefit
| Group | Benefits |
|---|---|
| Potential rETH holders | A tokenomics rework would make Rocket Pool marketable again. rETH would give users the best decentralized option. |
| rETH holders | The tokenomics goal is to ensure all offerings are competitive with other staking providers, including rETH. |
| Potential NOs | A lot of node operators are turned off by the high RPL requirements. There are many ideas that could allow little to no RPL exposure. |
| NOs | Tokenomics will lead to higher APR and much more options. |
| Community | Community sentiment is very low, tokenomics is one of the only hopeful items left for some. The GMC backing these efforts is essential. |
| RPL holders | All of the above benefits will lead to a higher RPL price. |
Costs
How much USD $ is the applicant requesting be awarded to the recipient?
$80,000 - $100,000
With the treasury sitting at over $1M and arguably the most important year in the protocol’s future, GMC should be devoting as much resources as possible to the tokenomics rework.
Split will be determined by compiling peer review data. Top 10 members from Rocket Scrape data will be polled on their opinion of each other member’s contributions. If available, the content of the peer review questions will be verified by knoshua and LFW to ensure efficiency. Members with higher scores will receive higher splits proportionally.
Valdorff and knoshua, two major contributors to the tokenomics rework, reviewed the compensation systems (not the amounts) of these tokenomics applications (round 13) in the GMC Discord here.
Is the applicant requesting RPL or LUSD?
RPL
Conflict of Interest
Does the person or persons requesting the retrospective award have any conflicts of interest to disclose? (Please disclose here if you are a member of the GMC or if you have nominated a member of the GMC for this retrospective award).
I am the GMC administrator. I exclude myself from any compensation for tokenomics reworks.