Potential Governance Proposal and Discussion Thread here:
With the Monero bridge going live today, there has been some discussion on how to properly incentivize sXMR pools on Secret Swap. There were two initial waves of thought:
Vote on it with a governance proposal.
Have the SEFI Executive Governance Committee push it through.
Use of the SEFI Committee to push through rewards would properly incentivize use of the bridge and Secret Swap, but has been viewed by some as overreach that would render actual governance useless.
While it is clearly enumerated in the passed Proposal #1, “The committee will have the following executive powers… Modifying up to 20% of the distribution of SEFI rewards” which certainly had exact moments like this in mind, I think that some form of compromise between the two propositions will best cater to the strengths of each idea.
The SEFI Committee SHOULD immediately incentivize the sSCRT-sXMR pool, and only that pool, and not heavily. Accompanying governance proposal(s) should enumerate a higher weighting of that pool, and perhaps introduce other incentivized pools as well. Should the Monero community actively get involved with the bridge and swap, then these proposals probably won’t be difficult to pass (this is my expectation). If they don’t, the XMR pool won’t be over-incentivized.
It’s important to continue to facilitate and highlight the utility of our novel governance platform, and sharing this with the wonderful and strong Monero community is a great next step. As always I’d love feedback in the comments, including more specific potential weightings.
My understanding of the sefi executive committee’s role here is to quickly implement things like this when it’s (1) the expected behavior based on past actions or on active discussions [this is expected because it’s how other key pools were rolled out], (2) an issue where more immediate action is helpful to the success of sefi [clearly the case with getting rewards going for a newly bridged asset, at least one as important as xmr]. Since this has to involve some judgement call on the committee’s part, they should get a gov proposal to confirm the action asap but I don’t think that act-and-ask erodes governance at all…especially since we passed prop 1.
Excellent feedback, and I like the idea of a confirmation proposal. We might have to further specify how temporary (if deemed temporary) the committee’s decisions are in order to necessitate that the accompanying proposal reaches quorum, but I think that you’re on to something here!
100% agree. Exec committee should just their judgement to make a reasonable temporary incentive while putting forth their rationale and then help the community reach consensus / quorum on a more permeant proposal / policy
This seems to be the route we’re taking, with the caveat of choosing SEFI/sXMR rather than sSCRT/sXMR based on the vote of the Executive Committee. Again I strongly support putting forward Governance Proposals to raise the weight of the SEFI/sXMR pool to bring higher incentives here.
