Thanks for your sharing your ideas!
A design in which ATOM holders’ decision is entirely based on the risk/return for the Cosmos Hub is what we have now. ATOM Wars aim to encourage ATOM holders to participate in funding decisions in exchange for a tribute for supporting a particular project. Projects must compete for such support. However, holders should also evaluate projects based on quality and their impact on the Hub. There’s a long-term incentive tied to this: if supporters choose low-quality projects and funds are lost, future funding for ATOM Wars may decrease, impacting supporters’ future profits. Since the community pool bears the primary cost of lost funds, not individual supporters, @JohnMontagu has suggested additional measures to better align these incentives.
Bid payments are conditional on winning. Hence, the loser project in your example will not pay anything.
This is a flexible parameter that can be easily adjusted. We’re eager to hear what the community thinks about it. Thanks for your feedback.
Yes, this is a risk that we want to mitigate. The options you mentioned could be helpful in addressing it.