**[Proposal]** Developer Incentives

I like this much better than just a one off mint. Looks better and will provide more consistent funding over time.

1 Like

This is such a terrible way of thinking about it… Do you think Tesla got to a $800B market cap by setting aside a percent of their profits to pay their engineers?

1 Like

It’s not about a meme pump or a meme-number. It’s about belittling the integrity of the intiial vote and supporting the voting process. It will cause lasting damage. Sure the dev’s will get paid, but many people will exit, and there will be concerns about flip-flopping in every YIP that comes hereafter.


We’re not flip flopping. This is what governance looks like. Decisions change if the community votes for them to change.

It will prevent long-term damage. Do you want to hold a token with a fixed supply and no developers?


I think we’re all thinking about this a bit too much in terms of economics. Yes, it is inflation and could lead to a downturn in token price. Yes, this is (IMO) going to be offset in the near term by the benefit of retaining top devs. However, the real reason i fully support this is, it’s just the right thing to do. We have awesome devs, Andre, Banteg, and numerous others. They are incredibly dedicated, develop at a speed which is almost unbelievable, and in my experience have been very communicative and helpful throughout my time in this community.


Support this idea, but what happens when this incentive scheme is done the same problem arises? Because nothing stops a dev from selling all his/her YFI at the bottom of the next corrections and not have incentives aligned with the protocol anymore. What about minting an amount of YFI(whatever the amount is necessary) locking these into a dev contract/vault and the rewards these YFI generate are for the devs to divide/ do with as they please in perpetuity.(they can internally even create shares/tokens that represent ownership on a part of that vaults revenue) This assures that the devs compensation is always linked with the YFI token performance and aligns incentives permanently. This is seperate from the treasury needed to run the yfi ecosystem.


This also solves the issue of trust with minting/inflation/memepower between all parties in the ecosystem as any value concentration and value dilution is shared evenly

1 Like

Just wanted to add that Yearn embodies the concept of fair launch.

Minting additional supply for devs (despite a vote against minting) would strip the project from that very defining narrative, would be terrible optics and irremediably damage trust and its reputation.


This would also absolutely be worth doing, and is still a really small dilution relative to the benefit from the investment (and the incentive alignment and maintained invigoration). However, it seems a bit slow… funds at disposal right now on are going to be more critically valuable (they don’t have to be dispensed right away, but they could be if they are there) than funds 5 years from now — which is way off relative to the pace things will move. I would advise front loading more heavily.


I agree with this. We VOTED to BURN the minting keys. Apparently that is meaningless.

More generally, what is the point of the governance token if it pays nothing and it offers no no actual governance rights and is now about to be inflated away at a faster rate than fiat currencies? At that point YFI becomes nothing but a meme coin, with ZERO fundamentals backing its current (or any) market valuation.

Finally, I have to say that I am baffled by the alleged impoverished state of the devs. How is it even possible that someone working in DeFi is not a million dollars richer than they were in July? And this raises the additional question of precisely HOW all the money has been spent, because so far as I know this has not been provided to Governance. Amazingly. What I DO know is that according to The Daily Gwei, Blue Kirby was paid ~$7,000 USD a month for his “work.” In addition to this, he was given 25 YFI by Andre. Well I’m sorry, but if you are broke because you gave $750,000 in YFI to an idiot like Blue Kirby in ADDITION to paying him 7K a month, well then I have ZERO trust in your financial sense and responsibility, no matter how good of a coder you might be and it is your own fault that you are broke. The question is, how much deeper and how much more extensive are these financial eff-ups, and why were they undertaken without the approval of Governance?

I get that everyone loves Andre, as we should. He is a coding artist but let’s not turn this into a cult of personality. At that point the governance token really does become nothing but a meme coin – nothing but a means of signaling cultish devotion to Andre.


No, the fair launch is still fully in tact. This is the completion of the fair launch.

1 Like

A governance token becomes only a meme token when there is nothing left to govern.

We have a lot left to govern.

No it becomes a meme coin when the governance token offers no ability to govern anything. This is my point. The governance token is currently a joke. It just entitles people to sit in here and yell at each other and vote in what are de facto opinion polls. There is ZERO real benefit to holding a governance token.

What Andre and the devs should do is just disable the governance contract and do whatever they want to do and pay themselves 100% of whatever they earn with the vaults etc. The point is that this is where this is headed. There is nothing decentralized about this. the Governance token has nothing to do with governance. End the charade already.

1 Like

I support @banteg 's proposal.

2 YFI per day that is all.

If we don’t do it I anticipate all the Devs will move to very well funded projects like Badger, and YFI will be worthless.

And 33333 can be a new meme.

I wish Andre hadn’t scuttled Jeffrey Huang’s 3000 $YFI proposal very early on.


If up for giving them YFI, otherwise we should think of another solution to incentivise our Devs. I am all for supporting them. Seems like a reasonable request. 3% inflation is ok. I don’t get all the fuss. It’s still Decentralisation if we all decide that we can support the devs. If not YFI will have no value without devs.

Leaders in the space like @banteg have choices.

Salaries however high or small percentages of revenue are not appropriate for leaders, particularly in an area exploding such as defi.

I don’t care about investors exiting. Take YFI price back to $10k I don’t care I’ll still hold.

I care about devs exiting. That is all YFI is.


This is a respectable argument and I think we are seeing a wide variety of frames around YFI’s definition come forward

1 Like

Speaking on behalf of the Polychain team, below is a summary of our positioning on this proposal:

Polychain is largely supportive of the ideas underlying this proposal.

YFI has stood out to us as one of the fastest moving & most innovative projects in the DeFi space, a testament to the quality of developers that have emerged from the Yearn community. For this to continue, we strongly believe properly incentivizing developers (and development) needs to be a top priority for YFI holders, and this is likely to be a key driver of the long-term success of this project. The marketplace for developers in the crypto ecosystem is incredibly competitive — thus, it is crucial that we keep Yearn developers economically incentivized to support this project. The consequences of failing to do so could be dire.

Inflation funding is one of the most powerful tools at DeFi projects’ disposal to incentivize development. We are supportive of the move to use a small amount of token inflation to position YFI for long-term, sustainable growth.

With that said, YFI dilution should not be taken lightly. We expect any proposal that mints new YFI to be accompanied by a detailed breakdown of the use of proceeds that should be scrutinized by the community. Pending a review of this, Polychain could be in a position to vote in favor of this proposal.


I have been looking at the current proposals. and they speak loud about that the DEVs appear to be under incentivized. I have no conception of the level of truth here. But to this, I can agree…

Also, this Mint of YFI came from YFI_LIT, I don’t know who this is. this might be my problem. but having someone I don’t know express that Minting is a good idea, is received a lot differently than having a core member propose it. The Buyback and Build was authored by 6 names, 5 of which I recognise in an instant.

I know that this is bias, but it certainly influences decisions. Logic should play the only role, but this is a factor in the decision nonetheless.

there is the other side… that Devs don’t want to seem greedy…and perhaps YFI Lit is speaking for them from a place of privy but I think generally, we all agree that the devs should feel well paid for the work they do. It’s an impossibility for almost everyone. and the stress of a single mistake is a lot of take into account.

Perhaps all these current proposals could be stricken and someone with the ability, time, and dialogue, put together something that is clear, in its source, logic, and considerations could set forth a new one.

In the same day, I read about Minting YFI for devs, and converting the treasury to buy back YFI to give to the Devs (or “contributors”), and with the understanding that V2 should increase their rewards significantly (this understanding was articulated by the core at the time of that proposal)

the goal of all these is very clear that people doing the work should be compensated, and I think a clear concise proposal would be received unanimously

All this being said, Im just some guy that makes silly videos and holds less than 1 YFI, so I probably should just sit back and watch


If holders are “mercenaries” and devs are “slaves”, but devs carry the weight on their shoulders for innovation (which is important to holders), then why cant simply all holders give a proportional 0.5 % of their holder YFI to devs?
Instead of risking the project reputation with minting more 30 K fixed supply.

Isn’t minting more (quantitate easing) exactly the same thing the “new digital defi currency system” trying to defeat against FIAT.

Also I would remove the concrete bank’s name from the post, instead i would put any %bank%.

The JP Morgan reference seems weird to me, because they are not an innovative bank (I work with all banks world wide).

Please support my awesome idea.
I have no idea what IYFI is but if somebody can send me 1 i will create a wallet especially for it and i will make a small tattoo on my foot with your username.