This forum is ideal to discuss WFC, pre-WFC, or broader ideas in general. Let’s not be overly restrictive.
2 Likes
I like it but how about 60/40?
What do you think @ParaNodes?
we could test out different variations through multiple WFCs at the same time. We can get the necessary decision deposit sourced, don’t worry about that.
Let’s focus on discussing some interesting alternatives with the community and then push them to a vote.
2 Likes
It sounds very good👍
Maybe 3 options?
we are now funding system chain collators from the treasury because it would be absolutely unsustainable to run them with income from transaction fees alone.
on the relay chain, we are currently seeing around 380 DOT in daily fees flowing to validators, which is quite minimal and insignificant compared to the ~333,333 DOT that is minted daily.
therefore, this proposal isn’t going to transform polkadot into ultrasound money, but rather seems like wasted energy focusing on pennies. some validators have recently expressed their concerns through ref 1307, indicating they lack sustainable income to maintain operations while validator count and hardware requirements continue to increase. this situation could likely lead to further centralization of the active validator set, as those operating single validators may no longer be able to afford continuing their operations.
would really love it if the effort and energy was focused on how to pump the actual numbers of chains and xcm up, instead of playing these zero sum games when there is absolutely nothing on the pot to play with.
6 Likes
I find it a positive attempt to recover the economy of the network.
Polkadot is already too big to move with more than 1.5 Billion Dots in circulation. However, I think it is better to fund the treasury for funding future development activities.
Burn 25%, 25% treasury, 50% validators.
With this, validators will also be more incentivized.
1 Like
Sir, you are focusing on the present, don’t you know that Plaza & Polkadot App is coming?
The treasury has a fixed inflow of money. Even if it were double, it would still seem little to them. This is what happens in my country when they try to justify a tax to continue bleeding the country’s economy dry.
After reading many opinions from the community. I think the distributions that resonate the most would be something like:
1- 80% burn, 20% validators.
2- 40% treasury, 40% validators, 20% burn.
3- 50% burn, 50% treasury.
1 Like
From the conversations in the last few days, the best arguments I heard so far are that the volume from tx fees is very low atm and it might not satisfy the push to implement changes right now. Maybe we should revisit the topic once smart contracts on the Hub are launched.
It should be done as soon as possible, but that is my personal opinion.
1 Like
Better idea why don’t we release it as a native Plaza feature. When Iota released their L1 Rebased they did this.
At the current stage, since the gas fee is too low, it’s okay to adopt the model of “1 - 80% burn, 20% validators.” When the gas fee becomes considerably higher in the future, we can then consider adjusting it to the second option.
1 Like