Thanks @wpb. We can continue with this one. I think there has been a lot of good discussion and I would hate to lose that by starting another post. Rather than recreate the post I will just clarify my reasons for supporting this proposal.
-
Do I see this as the final solution?
No. I consider this to be a stop gap measure that will deter further exploitation by parties who simply want to increase their daily rewards, advertise products, and/or spread disinformation. -
Why not wait for a better solution to be implemented?
Let’s consider the following steps that have to be completed in order for a better (complex) solution to be implemented:
-
Community Activities
– Brainstorming (1 week)
– Community deliberates on a proposal (1 week)
– Vote on a proposal (1 week)
– Appeal to Dfinity for support developing the solution (1 week) -
Dfinity Activities
– Dfinity drafts a design ( 4 weeks?)
– Dfinity submits design for review (1 week)
– Community votes on design (1 week)
– Dfinity plans & schedules development/testing effort (1 week)
– Indeterminate amount of lead time (months? - quite possible and understandable)
– Dfinity develops the solution (2 weeks)
– Dfinity tests the solution (2 weeks)
– Dfinity submits code update to NNS (1 day)So based on that very rough estimate, we are looking at anywhere from 3-6 months (optimistically?). During this time the NNS will continue to be spammed and I believe this will cause stakeholders, and those looking to participate in governance, to lose respect for the NNS and become complacent in their voting habits. Basically, I think we will see less manual voting and more passive voting over time.
-
Why does this proposal not suffer from the same delays?
Because the proposal type for increasing the cost already exists. We wouldn’t need Dfinity’s assistance in developing anything. Although, I will likely need some minor support constructing the correct dfx command. -
Am I concerned that this will deter meaningful proposals from being submitted?
I think the term “meaningful” can have different connotations depending on the individual. For me, a meaningful proposal is more than just a good idea. It’s a proposal that has already been deliberated amongst a community of stakeholders (not necessarily on this forum) and already has some backing. If those conditions are met then I do not see 10 ICP getting in the way of that community submitting the proposal. -
Would you support a proposal to reduce the cost when a better solution is implemented, or if the price of ICP increases substantially?
Absolutely. I believe the proposal type exists exactly for that reason. To be adjusted as-needed.
Edit: I have zero insight into Dfinity’s planning & scheduling. These estimates are based purely on my own observations over the last year.