The constant number for reserve list does not make sense.
Imagine the situation where algorand would promote grants program extensively, and there are requests for 100M algos and only 2M allocated.
Lets say there is 200 proposals for 500k Algo.
And lets say everyone votes for all proposals uniformly… With big number theory this is quite real.
So all voters distribute for each proposal 40 000 algos, and all proposals would miss 400000-40000 = 360k Algos to pass. Thus no proposal will pass and we are at square 1. So do you want to finance ecosystem projects or you want to see the failure of the algo grants program again?
So the question is who can sqew the big number thery to his favor? The answer si quite simple - Whales. People who had a lot of algos in the begining can pass the proposals that they want. And math is pretty simple there as well. If you have for example 10% of all votes, you can request 10% of the allocated budget for your project and you can pass it. (Also smaller players can do this, if you hold 0,5% of xgov votes, you can request 10k algo with confidence it passing)
So the question is, what is target of the xgov voting session… Is it to build a new projects on algorand blockchain giving out 2M algos each quarter, or is it to support whales fund their selected projects?
Please cancel the reserve list completely and do it the way that anyone can request grant. Sort all proposals with popularity and fund the best. Let’s break barriers of entry and allow anybody to propose anything they need in the algorand ecosystem. Also it might be good to have some idea place where people who do not have dev capacity to write and propose what they want to see built.
There is many people however wanting to have some threshold in place. So if you want to do the threshold, please do it variable not constant. Please use at minimum the requested amount variable, allocated funds variable, number of people who do not vote, and more.
Also 2M algos is really not much to distribute in my opinion. I dont understand how poeple are happy with this when AF is giving out much more grants directly to them selected companies giving out much more to support defi ecosystem or distribute much much more through the governance…
Also in light of #82, i would like to call to make a allocated funds to be distributed in multiple categories. I shot the #82 the Prague community meetups to the vote as the example how worldwide voting does not favor the local events. Most of the voters does not have any incentive to vote for some events in europe if they live in the US or India, but they have incentive to vote for something they get the service in return such as the CL AMM. Which is absolutely logical. However this demonstrate that some projects have higher probability to pass than others. To make this more fair perhaps some funding categories should be created, and if we want to support also the local events, local hackathon grants or whatever this should be done. Or perhaps this is argument why there should not be the reserve list threshold. Or parhaps there should be some other variable someone create to allow some projects to have lower threshold for passing.