Overall reaction
My gut reaction (not reflecting governance team view at this stage, personal opinion) is that in the long run, it makes more sense to figure out how to be able to have delegated tokens still be able to access DeFi/staking. I appreciate the intent but I believe the various versions of offering yield for delegating is a temporary fix until that adjustment is made. Without a lot more data, I wouldn’t feel comfortable arguing for pursuing this over using the 457k in a wallet that auto-abstains or delegating that amount equally to delegates. Interested in hearing thoughts from those who are excited about IDVs and how they see the risk/rewards relative to the other votable supply ideas.
I’m also going to move this over to ‘General’ from ‘Proposals’ as it’s not in the official proposal format (forum, google doc version). I think this is better to have an initial discussion, and if there is interest, then adjust to the formal proposal structure.
Comments
To be explicit, the funds that go into the IDV, do they interact with DeFi and actually earn yield? Just reading this I get that the sense that the yield the delegator earns is covered from the ‘320K SCR for Season 1 reward emissions’ bucket. Let me know if I’m misunderstanding something.
Aren’t the funds coming from the DAO treasury for the emissions?
Can you help unpack this a bit more and provide more details. Can you share with which DAO? 1.5m USD value or 1.5m of the relevant token? Why not start with a much lower amount if 1.5k can lead to 1000x results to just see if we would have any initial traction?
Can you please clarify what this means?
How do you see this going beyond the first proposal? How sustainable is this approach over time?
Can you provide some more color on how the funds would get used?