NU7 Sentiment Polling: Questions for Community Review & Coinholder Voting via Zodl

[aquietinvestor]

@daira

[Scope section and Question 1] “NSM fee burning” → “NSM removal of funds from circulation (ZIP 233)”

I am okay with this change.

@daira

I continue to think we should have a separate question on ZIP 235.

I disagree.

Per your request during the last polling round, the ZIP 235 question was broken out into a separate question [1]. All community panels and coinholders voted in support of unissuing 60% of transaction fees via the NSM. See the consolidated results below.

Generally speaking, I do not think we should re-poll questions simply because certain people are unhappy with the results, but that is especially true here given that the outcome received overwhelming support from both coinholders and every community panel. Re-polling in situations like this sets an extremely bad precedent.

I also do not think it makes sense to introduce a new “less than 60%” option at this stage. There has never been a proposal for anything other than 60%, and when you requested that the ZIP 235 question be separated out in the prior poll, you did not ask for that option to be included. So I do not understand the rationale for introducing it now, after the prior polling results are already known.

Changing the available options after results are known risks creating the perception that previously settled questions are being reopened in search of a different outcome. That undermines the credibility of the polling process.

---

Footnote:

[1] You asked for the NSM question to be split up:

@daira

I believe question 2 should be split into two questions:

2a. What is your general sentiment toward the following aspects of the Network Sustainability Mechanism: the ability to explicitly remove funds from circulation (ZIP 233), and smoothing of the future issuance curve leading to the eventual reissuance of these removed funds (ZIP 234)?

2b. What is your general sentiment toward the following aspect of the Network Sustainability Mechanism: requiring 60% of transaction fees to be removed from circulation?

I conceded and the question on ZIP 235 was presented as a separate question:

@aquietinvestor

We will split the NSM into two separate questions…

Here are the two questions:

2. What is your general sentiment toward adding protocol support for the Network Sustainability Mechanism (NSM), including smoothing the issuance curve, which allows ZEC to be removed from circulation and later reissued as future block rewards to help sustain network security while preserving the 21 million ZEC supply cap?

3. What is your general sentiment toward burning 60% of transaction fees via the Network Sustainability Mechanism (NSM)? The goals are to prevent miners from manipulating fees, to demonstrate Zcash’s commitment to long-term sustainability, and to burn ZEC so that it can be re-issued in the future without exceeding the 21M supply cap.