I’m FOR the proposal.
There’s the option also of setting a lower percentage while emphasizing that donations to the fund will be accepted. This would lower the “taxation” burden on smaller yCRV recipients while endorsing some virtue signalling that may go on anyway.
Good catch, updated to:
Don’t put a proposal number – title will be updated by mods once the proposal is finalized.
Agree with banteg – would rather prefer one-off minting rather than dev share.
Not a big fan of one-off minting. Now that the 30,000 limit cap is removed, what does 1000 - 1500 means in a longer term picture? It would require a lot of effort to justify additional minting for the reserve when $YFI increases in price sharply. Additionally, minting extra tokens beyond distribution purpose is going to have a bad taste internally/externally. Not to mention, the protocol/community will need to keep track of $YFI price fluctuation for accounting/spending purposes. IMO, having a percentage of the fee rewards reserved for protocol use is a much better approach and easier to get supported by everyone.
Updated to make the 5% rewards capture more generic in order to support yEarn V2 
Voting on YIP 14 just started: https://ygov.finance/vote.
YIP 14 ends in less than 24 hours.
10,105,087 further votes are required to pass 33% quorum.
Quorum now stands at 0.69%,
YIP 14: @ Block #10542807
~Mon Jul 27 2020 5:00:00 PM +UTC
https://etherscan.io/block/countdown/10542807
Click on the Notification bell for alert when the block is mined!
Consider also making your voice heard, discussion on reducing quorum on: YIP 12: reducing the quorum for accepting proposal
Can we use some of this reserve to pay governance gas fees? Instead of interacting with ABI of a contract another contract can use a signed message from our wallet to cast the vote and pay the fees.
That’s an option but someone has to do deeper research on signing options\ready solutions.
I’d be curious to hear if the community would be interested in allocating a small portion of that reserve to the yEarn Community Fund DAO. The sole purpose would be for people to submit proposals to work on extending the yEarn ecosystem.
Basically a yEarn grants DAO.
I guess my question would be if (and when) this passes, how is that reserve planning to be allocated? I think something different from a YFI-only onchain vote makes sense given the quorum threshold and (likely) higher quantity of small reserve allocations to things like server costs, governance moderation etc.
I guess my question would be if (and when) this passes, how is that reserve planning to be allocated?
We discuss this separately when it passes.
But now we need to push YIP-14 cause quorum is too low.
Can we do a PSA on yEarn twitter to get some voting going?
Looks like we’re still pretty far off in terms of the amount of votes we’ll need for this to pass. I’m almost thinking a more coordinated rollout of this same concept following the announcement of new incentives will get the most traction.
If this specific one doesn’t pass b/c of quorum (99% yes votes) I’m happy to team up to give it a bigger social push to make sure it passes quorum on a second take
I agree. There is discussion to make a gitcoin grant for security review funding for immediate needs, so if this ends up lumped with issuance that seems fine.
Would anyone be interested in the idea of putting 100% of fees generated right now into a Reserve Fund? In other words not paying out any of the collected fees for the time being?
Clearly we need to have funds for such things as Audits as requested on twitter by the yearn.finance account. It makes more sense to me to hold on to the fees generated by the protocol for now and use them for some of our expenses, rather than relying on YFI issuance for everything. I know that’s what this 5% proposal is about, but why not let the reserve pool build up faster, we can always pay out the rewards later.
YIP 14 is related conservative and only required 5% of the total yields. Even then, we can’t even get enough quorum; I doubt people would vote for 100% of fees generated.
YIP 14 seems popular in terms of the vote ratio. I think there is still a problem of visibility and organization, for instance yieldfarming.info doesn’t have anything listed for what YIP 14 is about.
And just to be clear my idea isn’t that 100% would go to a Dev/Audit fund, just that we would cease paying out for a time and accumulate into a Reserve Fund so that we have money for said things already in place.
Bad idea. This sounds like another attack vector. Someone could drain the LP through excessive voting. No?
When viewed in the context of YIP-14 if it passes; this proposal has majority ‘for’ votes but no quorum currently, this could mean that we are not for settling for a fixed percentage?
Otherwise we can instead have a proposal for the yield % going to reward reserves, set at 0% initially and further increase later on, until a maximum threshold of 5 - 9%. (uniswap-v2 also has the protocol fee variably set at zero)
Reviewed on another thread here - Absolutes and differentials on this blog post by Vitalik who talks about setting a success metric:
To find out what is the percentage of yield to be set aside as protocol fees, but instead letting prediction markets determine the outcome.
To illustrate, if the TVL (success metric) crosses a certain milestone after 12 months, then protocol fees are increased by 1% or lowered 1% accordingly as determined by prediction markets.
Smmry link (intro to futarchy):
