I don’t like block rewards as a mechanism to fund. I think the sooner it’s replaced by gas/transaction fees the better. Now if there was some type of way the gas is used to create a type of “treasury” acccount. then the treasury account is the source of funding; that starts to make more sense to me. But the current structure is not good for the ecosystem or making sure development is as focused on creating products people want as it could be. when the ecosystem is supported by gas/fees, it highly aligns development with creating products people want. and if developers don’t create the products people want, they have their own money at staked as opposed to someone else’s (eg zec holders) so this kind of sounds like another tax on zec holders.
hopefully i’m just not understanding the source of funding…
It’s starting to feel like the community is dominated by grant recipients as opposed to independent developers. i say no more centralized funds. My belief is ZEC holders are just voting by selling as opposed to trying to guide or vocalize the flaws in block rewards as a funding mechanism. Move to gas ASAP: the funds should come directly from gas. so if wallet A creates 1m in transactions and wallet B creates 1 in transactions, wallet A gets a direct slice of the fees based on its transactions. wallet B gets basically nothing no matter how much we like them. Block rewards funds both equally.
In my view Block Rewards is a total loser and will kill ZEC (there is no philosopher king here to make all the right decisions). So the next best alternative is a market based mechanism. Now block rewards was good in the beginning; but I strongly believe it will be bad in the end. No successful businesses survive based on issuing stock constantly to fund losses. And economically, that is what we have when there is no gas…Currently there is no objective measure of performance and that’s mainly due to the economics of the ecosystem, which is more like a centralized tax as opposed to free market mechanisms (which to me is gas based).
My laymen’s understanding is
- Foundation - focused on core block chain
- ECC - focused on ZEC, which longer term likely turns in to an L2 asset, or something to that effect.
- Grants - focused mainly on ZEC use cases; ideally a gas mechanism is put in place to eliminate the need or substantially reduce the need for grants. Then we start to enable people to create self funded projects with the expectation the gas will more than pay them back.
- Sustainability Fund - If this is based on gas and it just automatically allocates money based on some objective metric and goes directly to the actual developers based on their applications transactions, I like that. And some % of gas fees would also go to the foundation and ECC as well. On the other hand, why not just build it into the protocol and not have the overhead of yet another centralized fund?