Proposal for a Community + Coin Holder Funding Model

[Boggerster]

I am very much in favour of coin voting (past ref. 1), and specifically prioritising votes from the shielded pool (past ref. 2) as to:

1. incentivise coin migration towards orchard → better privacy for everyone → better value proposition for Zcash as a whole
2. avoid, as you mentioned in another thread, transparent custodian exchanges voting with customer funds

Looking at some comments from this and Josh’s other thread makes me think that there a need for separate debates regarding:

1. what will be the weight/power of coinholder voting? here I very much like @nuttycom’s comment about coin-approve, key-veto:

@nuttycom

The more I think about it, the more I think that a “coinholder approval, keyholder veto” model makes sense. Coinholders may not have sufficient context/expertise to judge a proposal; a keyholder veto means that requests for changes that are likely to be dangerous can be defended against.

2. what pools should be included, and if multiple pools, should there weight be equal

My position has not changed around coin voting good and shielded voting best, but more widespread in-app voting (Zashi), and or vote delegation is necessary if we wish to distill true coinholder consensus. Some added dimensionality around voting weights, e.g. 1 t-zec = 1 vote, but 1 orchard zec = 2 votes might make vote inclusion feel less like a stick, and more like a carrot (referencing @peacemonger) whilst still incentivising better protocol-level privacy.