In reference to fee sharing, I think it would be smart to consider what the tradeoff might be. I like veYFI as an idea because we can build a gauge system to create some sort of positive sum cycle in the tokenomics, instead of just giving away dividends for free.
One example would be for v3’s design, letting veYFI decide the strategy allocations the way currently is being set manually by the management role in the vault. If that were combined with some sort of backstop mechanism, it’s sort of a “Holy Trinity” of incentives: earn fees by properly balancing reward (historical yield rates) vs. risk (potential for loss) continuously (rebalancing every week). Contributors can provide the data necessary to make these decisions, leaving the repetitive and exhausting work of continual re-balancing in the communities’ hands
The backstop mechanism could also be a little more interesting than Aave-style liquidations. Since veYFI would have variable weight from staking over time, we can leverage the “locked” YFI (as it would otherwise be inaccessible) as collateral to take out a loan and repay potential losses and shortfalls, repaying the loan with protocol fees (which we saw be very successful in the February yDAI hack). There would be a saturation point to the available funds for this kind of backstop (40% of TLV, planning ahead for unlock time), and this would provide some natural incentive to consider allocations seriously, but also take some consumerate level of risk as the backstop exists in case the mark is missed somehow on risk management.
TL;DR Lets have some fun with it!