Sinsecato Has a good point. These valid concerns should be addressed appropriately. Any system we come up with should be open to continuous refinement…with the goal “to make a more perfect union” 
Although I am FOR this proposition assuming no voting rights, I am AGAINST until YFI mint keys are burned. We governors need to know how much dilution will happen to the YFI token before starting to vote in, say, something like 10% of rewards taken in by YFI will be given back to YFII, however much I do think its a good idea which I do
Agree…We should be careful …but take on this challenge…and come up with a good framework to address potential negatives…
1 Like
I’m in agreement with this proposal.
This proposal is an innovative way to stay ahead of the competition, there will be many on a long term horizon. If we cut out the competitors now, we are sending a message that YFI wants to fight to be the one and only. Instead we can all work together and earn $ from each network.
If YFII is our back door into the massive Asian market, so be it. For now they fork YFI but in the future it could be our community forking an innovation from YFII.
2 Likes
lets do an onchain vote, anyone can make a profile here and swing the poll
3 Likes
In principle, I’m in favor. This is different than a fund of funds model in the hedge fund world.
Specific details of course need to be worked out - but if a second project delivers value to YFI, I see no downside with sharing some of those rewards back. It’s best for future growth.
(and yes, I want to see an on chain vote)
5 Likes
I am in favor of paying a commission to projects which contribute to yearn. The question that remains is who gets incentivised?
I agree that incentivising the dubious and highly questionable YFII copypasta is a bad idea and would move to blacklist YFII from receiving system rewards.
Should such a system be open? Should we vote on who can receive system fees? What happens if malicious actors are contributing to AUM? What the legal ramifications of paying out system fees indiscriminantly?
I don’t want to see this on chain yet. The idea is good, but it must be developed in more detail before we go on chain.
AGAINST for now but will flip FOR if certain questions are answered.
3 Likes
I think the best is Andre disclose the details of how the rewards are coming from, so the ppl who against this proposal will understand the story clearly 
Otherwise , it’s hard to discuss this issue in a good way.
IMHO.
1 Like
We’d get a cut from what they contribute to the pool
It seems to me most people misunderstood this, it’d be beneficial to explain the dynamics correctly (if someone can do it).
My takeaway: As far as I understand it, the protocol would 'kick back" part of the earnings generated from YFII owners to their token holders (the other part directly going to Vaults or YFI owners or whichever model will be chosen by then), but it’s still accretive to YFI holders, there’s nothing coming out of YFI holders pockets. YFI inflation wouldn’t be used to reward YFII holders. Or am I mistaken?
3 Likes
I think it’s a good idea to be open.
ANY protocol that increases our yield should get a % of the yield we are making back.
Even more so if the said protocol taps on communities that are not easy for most to approach.
The YFI token will ONLY strengthen from this move.
The proposal mentions very clearly that the YFI token will NOT get diluted. Only a part of our rewards will go back the the other protocol. Learn to read people.
1 Like
support community and support it for all
Founder wants to empower other communities
Current community saying no
Tribalism.
1 Like
good，as YFI HOLDERS, I choose FOR. Market is big and we can do better together
1 Like
this forum is clearly getting hijacked by YFII supporters.
-
Should be split profits with the Compound/AAVE/mstable community because they provided us yields?
-
Should we split yields with YFII/YFIII/YYFFIIIII/(insert any possible future forks)?
-
Should a proposal be rejected (Prop 8) a fork happens, people farm an alternative token and now share the yields like they were holding YFI as if Prop 8 passed anyways?
-
Should 3) be allowed and thereby rendering all future voting meaningless?
If you answered no to any of the above then you should be against this poll.
I agree with building strong relationships with communities, the way to do that is to have better translations so people have less of a barrier to join THIS community, the YFI community, not create another one then pretend it’s the same or equal to this one.
4 Likes
Great idea! Let’s unite and amplify the interest for everyone! Let’s support decentralisation.
hijacked by YFII supporters? nope.
Definitely “For”. Strong communities make for a strong network that incentivises current and future stakeholders.
I’m in the Chinese wechat group, that’s EXACTLY what is happening.