[bisq-network/proposals] Calculate the BSQ price rate for compensation and reimbursement requests from Burning Man trades (#269)

[chimp1984]

> I think rough consensus is a reasonable target, with DAO voting as the exception. The compensation maintainer suggests the BSQ price for next cycle a week before end of proposals. If there is no contention that number stays, otherwise it has to be taken to voting, much like what @chimp1984 is suggesting but without the vote if there is no disagreement beforehand.
> 
> In the end, the DAO participants are voting on compensation requests and if those requests use a BSQ value that is not considered right, then the CRs won't get approved.

I agree to 100% to avoid voting as long there is rough consensus. Lets start with that now to avoid that manipulation will have effect in the next cycle. 

Maybe its good to make this time a DAO proposal for requesting approval from the stakeholders to change the model to not use automatically the 30 days average price but to use the model described above.
I would make that GH and DAO proposal, if nobody has strong reasons against it.

Additionally to make a DAO proposal for defining the rate for the next cycle.
@MwithM Could you make a proposal for the BSQ rate you think is correct for the next cycle? 

As it is a change of a social consensus rule I think a DAO voting has more weight and finds better acceptance.

For upcoming cycles we only need rough consesnsu on the GH proposal and only if that is not clear we need to make a generic DAO proposal. 

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/269#issuecomment-715958953
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20201024/6dcc58b9/attachment.html>