Thank you for all this! This was very well explained and I appreciate the effort. In response to the “-Expansion of metrics…” and “Consider a tiered weight for TVL” I would definitely like to see more data, from multiple sources and across multiple perspectives, tracking impact ecosystem-wide and comparing A) new projects going live B) liquidity injections from the Foundation as well as known VC wallets C) Shifts in ALGO governance reward mechanisms/amounts/defi (broken down by liquid governance protocols vs LP commits) vs vanilla, and D) weighted against macro factors such as market volume as a whole (or some comparable metric). I definitely think there is room for refinement with our current DeFi focus and measuring the impacts our governance decisions are having.
With that said, completely agree on the drafting an ARC standard for any and all Governance matters from this point out. I think this can help not only projects looking for guidance within the ecosystem already, but also give outsiders a clearer picture of what is going on within our community. If we are doing our job well enough to stand the light of day, so to speak, then this will attract more growth on all fronts.
Yep, at the end of the day Governance should act as both the voice of the community and a way to grow the chain. If it simply ends up as a passive yield generator we’ll stagnate and we won’t be able to attract new builders and new projects.
I don’t love the idea of putting so much of the reward pool into DeFi… for starters, it sets a precedent that may hinder later allocation ideas. For example, once you create one-click nodes and get a ton more people running nodes, it would be better for the security and scalability of the blockchain to reward those people each period as well. And for people who don’t participate in DeFi given the risks of hacks, but who want to be in governance, they are getting slowly diluted each period. I would leave it as is and not expand this program beyond the current allocation.
in what sense? please can you post the report that backs up this claim? Because pricewise it is really the opposite.
Foundation released a report on the success of this initiative a while back.
Targeted DeFi Rewards Impact 6 April 2023
This report is totally useless. It says the targeted rewards was a success because the TVL increased at the time, more users participated in governance and governors earned more.
So everybody got more ALGO during governance which they dumped in the end and ALGO price tanked. Good job.
Even if all Governors dumped ALL rewards it wouldn’t have had the effect on price that you describe. The volume has been low for months, there were lots of macro factors effecting price as well. Also you must keep in mind that the total rewards for Governance are actually down, so how is it that the sale of rewards are driving the price down further when there are less? Your theory just doesn’t make sense. People exiting the market is one thing, but that’s not due to Governance or any Measure in particular.
I know for a fact I got way more rewards than I started. Find out how.