Polling ZCAP on NU7 priorities

[daira]

@Dodger

@daira

It should be made clear that ZIP 234 is not the only possible way to reintroduce funds burnt by ZIP 233, and that it would be coherent to activate ZIPs 233 and 234 (or an alternative to 234) without ever activating ZIP 235. (The current description incorrectly implies that accepting some of the NSM ZIPs will inevitably lead to accepting the others eventually.)

Can you suggest a relevant text change(s) for this […]

Replace that section of the poll description with:

Network Sustainability Mechanism (NSM)

Shielded Labs has proposed three ZIPs for NU7 to specify parts of the NSM, which could be deployed selectively or in stages:

• ZIP 233 would enable voluntary burning of ZEC to remove it from circulation.
• ZIP 234 would smooth the issuance curve, and reintroduce burnt coins into circulation in a predictable manner as part of future block rewards.
• ZIP 235 would require burning at least 60% of transaction fees.

ZIPs 234 and 235 depend on ZIP 233. ZIP 233 assumes that a way to reintroduce burnt funds will be deployed at some point; ZIP 234 is not the only possible way to do so. The ZIP Editors’ viability assessment raised questions over inclusion of ZIP 235. The NSM has also been discussed on the forum.