DFINITY Foundation’s vote on Governance proposal #80970 (“Spam proposal”) and #86639 ("Temperature Check")

Full disclosure: I do NOT work on Tokenomics or on positions of DFINITY within Tokenomics analysis and reccommendations (even in this spam case, I had to read up on this issue… you will see I was absent in the forum discussions), so I do not have anything wise nor special info to offer here.

I will say that the folks who do work in Tokenomics within DFINITY are reading this thread and I will also escalate this further.

If you want to know my opinion, I will just say what I have already written many times before publicly when recent tokenomics changes are proposed:

I support more good faith debates in ICP, even when I disagree. Thank you, Smaug for taking the time to share your ideas in good faith.

To be honest… I am very much a “dont do big things in complex systems” kind of guy. You could argue i am risk averse in tokenomics.

The idea of either locking OR unlocking any large amount of neurons changes the rules so much for my taste, that I would like to see some data or experiment to make sure it does more good than harm. I can come up with lots of stories where its good for the ecosystem and equally i can create stories where its bad, so I rejected this because “too rich for my blood.”

source: Force-Lock Seed Investors’ Neurons for 8 Years - #55 by diegop

1 Like