[bisq-network/proposals] Distribute BTC fees to contributors of last DAO cycle (#305)

[chimp1984]

> > What I like on that proposal is that it removes the need for the burningman at least for one part of his role. As the BM is a problematic and hard to solve problem the best solution for such circumstances is to get rid of it completely...
> 
> The filter would not remove the need to depend on some anonymous contributor(s) taking care of the donation address.
> I find the tradebot (#304) and swaps in general more promising (although they don't get rid of burningman anyway). At this proposal, I find it will be hard to follow spending. It will arise disputes between contributors about who got more BTC, as being compeansated in BTC is more desirable than in BSQ.
> The distribution is more decentralized when the burningman burns BSQ bought to traders than using the filter, reducing legal risks.

It is not using the filter but DAO data from compensation requests.
Yes it only solves one of 2 parts of the BM but at least that would be solved by that.
It is more decentralized and much easier to implement than the trade bot or swap ideas.
The distribution is statisitcal so over longer period its evenly distributed according to BSQ amounts in comp. requests.
I think the only issue is that it changes the revenue distributions to benefit more recent contributors, but that can be seen positive from Bisq perspective to creat more incentive to contribute now. For past contributors who are not active anymore it has a disadvantage. But to evenly benefit old inactive contributors to new ones was never an intendted policy but a result of how the BSQ burning works. I think to benefit new active contributors is a better policy. It also does not change 100% but only the part which is spent in BTC fees. Also as stated above we should continue to improve incentives that users use BSQ, so the goal to get 70-80% on fees in BSQ is still valid and by that the effect to old inactive contributor is lower.  

-- 
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/305#issuecomment-772783297
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20210203/30de1f2d/attachment.htm>