We don’t mean to undermine the immense complexities involved in changing the whole economics behind the ICS reward distribution. Currently these rewards are distributed to the stakers, leaving most holders with a lot of dust tokens in their wallets. This liquidity ends up being heavily fragmented and mostly “lost in the void”. Regarding the enormous amount of work this would take to gather reliable data and build a model to guide a governance debate on this subject, we thought it would be wiser to perform a “temperature check” first.
Please vote on the following poll to signal your willingness to enable such research or not:
*Votes are anonymous, we also provided a VETO vote to show strong opposition.
In any case we would be pleased to have a brief explanation on the reasons that motivated your votes in the reply section below.
To ensure the topic remains relevant, we have edited the title to clarify that we are not proposing any specific solution. There appears to be a misunderstanding as we initially suggested redirecting to the comm. pool. In reality, our intention is to initiate a broader discussion to reassess the current system.
We hope this clarification helps people better understand the scope of this post. If the community expresses interest in this debate, we will collect and compile data from all existing ICS rewards, analyze their distribution, and stimulate a governance discussion on potential improvements, if needed. While numerous possibilities exist, this is not the primary objective of this topic.
The sole aim is to ensure there is no strong opposition to this idea before we proceed to compile the data. Recognizing that the ICS reward debate may be intricate and potentially divisive, we aim to provide data to guide it appropriately. Considering the time required to gather this data, a temperature check seemed appropriate to ensure we do not invest time without community support.