**[Proposal]** Developer Incentives

[dripdrop]

Against. For supporting devs, but against ignoring the first onchain vote (which was contentious and led to initial clone projects). Devalues YFI narrative.

Would reconsider if it included burning of keys and statement from Andre that he would actually accept the minted funds. AND we should do only 1 modification at a time (wait until buyback and build proposal voting finishes). Too many variables.

Proposal also based on current revenue. What if revenue 10x after v2? Multisig have unlimited authority to re up the $500k treasury infinitely so infinite budget already. What if we just upped salaries and frequency of treasury refills?

[1centwhale]

If we don’t figure out a way to align dev and holder incentives this little fairytale will end. 1K YFI is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things. I voted FOR as a result.

[yfi_lit]

@Kromatikus

Why not set up a limited time core dev donation fund? I’d gladly donate .1 YFI and so would many others. Much better than minting new tokens.

Altruism doesn’t work. Would help a little but not to the same scale as a mandates, system-wide change.

[yfi_lit]

@1centwhale

If we don’t figure out a way to align dev and holder incentives this little fairytale will end. 1K YFI is pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of things. I voted FOR as a result.

You get it. Thank you.

@dripdrop

Against. For supporting devs, but against ignoring the first onchain vote (which was contentious and led to initial clone projects). Devalues YFI narrative.

Sorry, but this is wrong. YFI’s narrative is to become the world’s leading bank. The price action narratives of today are made obsolete by the products of tomorrow. Look at Ethereum versus Bitcoin.

We should get @andre.cronje & crew to write a statement saying that they would accept the funds and potentially do a burn at the same time. Great idea.

[yfi_lit]

Short term narrative change that will lead to us winning long-term.

Willing to take the bumps for the space ride.

[statelayer]

For : devs need vested upside into the protocol. For minting 1K YFI, but vesting over multiple years necessary

[cryptouf]

This post is attracting a lot of people. And a lot of new faces here !

Emotion is taking a big part in a lot of messages.

But let’s try to be more rational.

Why do we need that ? Can we have more data ? How much do we need to pay our Devs ? What are we talking about ?

How many Devs are in that list ? After removing core contributors (with recurrent grant) or strategists (they already received Incentives with fees)

Restructure fees and align incentives

Authors @banteg @fubuloubu @milkyklim @lehnberg @tracheopteryx Summary With Vaults v2 around the corner, it is a good time to analyze Yearn’s protocol-wide incentives and ensure they are aligned to produce the best possible outcome. This proposal reforms Yearn’s fee structure to keep it roughly at the same level, but charged differently, and distributed in a way meant to keep YFI stakers, strategists, and contributors better incentivized over the long term. Abstract The Vault withdrawal fee is…

We need to know that !

Then more philosophical comments. Does the point and the goal of V2 isn’t to increase TVL, so increase fees so increase the treasury ? If this is the case I’m sure our Devs will receive their parts.

And finally, and this is something fundamental. How do we see Yearn as a project and a DAO ? We already voted to freeze the supply as @Dark , @tracheopteryx and others already mentioned.

So what does that means ? What is the point of voting if 6 months later we didn’t take it into account, and we make a new one. Is it how we want to build the project and work as a community ?

Since the beginning 30k YFI is the core of this project. And we all agreed for that. If we change that, the project will take another direction, and I’m not sure people will trust the project any more.

[yfi_lit]

Disagree. Startups are meant to be flexible. Equity issuance is the best way to align incentives, plain and simple. Look at Elon and Tesla. I know numerous investors who only invest if the CEO has over 10% of the company.

How much of YFI do our builders own? Less than 1%…

There are a lot of people who will never buy YFI purely from this misalignment of incentives.

[yfi_lit]

The devs are inadequately compensated. How do the builders of a project own so little of the equity of their project?

Imagine building something that can literally become the future of finance, only to have a bunch of free riders say that they deserve more than you because of irrelevant memes.

[yfi_lit]

@TheSouthSeaCompany

For me, this proposal is marred by two flaws:

• the use of wholly inappropriate phrases like “indentured servitude” to describe something completely diffetent, and
• name dropping Andre without evidence he would participate in the incentive / bonus pool / whatever the minted YFI would become.

1. Someone who works for you without equity in the system, despite them doing much much more than you, is indentured servitude. You’re right, it is different, because they can always leave, and they will if your mindset is shared.

2. Andre rejects because he is selfless. It’s up to us to return that selflessness.

[yfi_lit]

What type of startup decides to never issue equity again?

You’re going to manage incentives poorly, and the project will suffer.

[hke_btc]

Imagine calling for unity literally one post after calling most of the community free riders.

[yfi_lit]

I’m currently one of those free riders. Here trying to fix that.

[cryptouf]

You are mixing everything

We are not a startup and We already voted for that.

@yfi_lit

How much of YFI do our builders own? Less than 1%…

Why do they need YFI ? They can receive yUSD and buy YFI with it. Not need to mint more token

@yfi_lit

There are a lot of people who will never buy YFI purely from this misalignment of incentives.

What’s the link with dev here ?

I agree with the main purpose (developer Incentives) but there is other and better way to do it. And again. We already voted !!!

And please answer my question. How much do we need for this ?

At the moment this proposal is empty and just there to make the buzz. We clearly don’t need that. Or if we do, prove it with numbers !

[yfi_lit]

@cryptouf

We are not a startup and We already voted for that.

Yes we are a startup. We’re less than a year old…

@cryptouf

Why do they need YFI ? They can receive yUSD and buy YFI with it. Not need to mint more token

If we do not align their incentives with ours, our YFI will be worthless.

@cryptouf

I agree with the main purpose (developer Incentives) but there is other and better way to do it. And again. We already voted !!!

If we cannot be flexible, we will lose.

@cryptouf

And please answer my question. How much do we need for this ?

I would like to see our builders own at least 10% of the entire Yearn Ecosystem. I thought 3% was very small, but enough to begin to align incentives, especially when matched with the new YIPs to redirect earnings to those who created those earnings.

I know smart people who will not invest in YFI because of an incentive misalignment. Eventually, when incentives are misaligned, the system breaks.

[Tedlove00]

To cut the cake what about inflation of 3% per 5 years with halving each 5 years ?

[cryptouf]

@yfi_lit

I would like to see our builders own at least 10% of the entire Yearn Ecosystem. I thought 3% was very small, but enough to begin to align incentives, especially when matches with the new YIPs to redirect earnings to those who created those earnings.

I know smart people who will not invest in YFI because of an incentive misalignment. Eventually, when incentives are misaligned, the system breaks.

Ok so clearly you have no argument here. Bad buzz…

And you should probably read more about how people contributing are or will be rewarded

[yfi_lit]

Lol what–fully aware of everything. How about debating the points of incentive misalignment?

[eze247]

You are mixing everything

Ya why are we mixing up YFI tokenomics with support for our developers?

Printing more YFI that will be dumped on our heads for daily expenses. Instead of paying with USD.

Is there a specific reason why can’t we support development with stablecoin income???

[emnl]

If the protocol makes enough revenue minting will never be a consideration. The solution is to make better products that fit the market. Not build for the sake of building.

Align product fee generation with value accrual for all interested parties, holders and devs. That simple.

I agree with the buyback proposal instead of this one.