Thank you for sharing this vision. It aligns with insights from other well-informed contributors who’ve shared their perspectives on the hub. We recommend readers explore the post introduced by @Thyborg here: The ATOM Wars: a new governance platform for liquidity injections. We’ve also engaged in the hub’s vision debate as part of our global report on the entire Cosmos Ecosystem: A permissionless B2B2C network.
Returning to your thesis, we want to highlight a few points we align with:
This is something we have greatly emphasized as well and is already well underway.
Back in December 2022, before LSM’s release, we shared our vision in IDEATION: Governance Councils & Treasury Modules, foreseeing its central role in general capital allocation. We also explored the governance decentralization power LSTs would bring. There’s so much more to explore on this frontier today…
Regarding this particular point we have advised multiple time that a dedicated Financial Committee should be, among other general risk management tasks, in charge of receiving and dealing with PoL requests. Gathering minimum data and formatting the proposal following a clear guidance.
We harbor total alignment with this statement and are currently in the process of building a governance model based on @Stride 's governors architecture to boostrap a class of high profile individuals specifically tasked to participate in governance forums with quality contributions. Using the delegation system of STRD tokens to these governors, we could create an economically viable solution for these people to find revenue sources compensating the time they spend (which is currently a volunteer job).
Feedback on the proposed Goals:
Goal #1:
Creating dedicated committees for high-importance tasks is a top priority. We believe the most pressing issues concern PoL allocation. We hope to collaborate with @Thyborg as his proposal offers elegant solutions that could address some of the issues in a decentralized way.
Goal #2:
Regarding LSM capabilities, we tend to agree that they are currently widely underused. We firmly believe that a Financial Committee is absolutely necessary to succeed in assessing global financial risks inherent in re-hypothecation. At Govmos, we offer our services for this task, with our co-founder Phil_RX, who has more than 13 years of experience in financial markets.
Goal #3:
Concerning the immense risk vector that a permission-less security model would induce, we sincerely recommend isolating it in a separate sub-hub model. We have an entire model yet to be released on that particular topic. It involves creating dedicated LST on the hub and moving it to this “permission-less sub-hub” where users can decide whether or not they want to venture into this world. Having separate sovereign governance is also absolutely required to quickly mitigate potential risks as they emerge. Before its public release here on the forum, we will be happy to discuss our modeling with anyone interested in this particular topic.
Conclusion:
Overall, we sincerely thank you for the effort to craft and share the vision you have for the Hub. Neutron is an incredibly valuable project, and we can hardly express how grateful we are to have you as one of the first partners in the AEZ. Surely, everyone involved in the Hub’s governance will say that we lack a collective vision, creating unnecessary slowdowns and hiccups. On the contrary, we think this is the key condition for a resilient and neutral public common infrastructure. Each individual vision should emerge as a proposal, gathering multiple divergent feedback before reaching a long, and sometimes painful, consensus.
Thank you for reading!
Govmos (the governance arm of the PRO Delegators’ Validator)
