Vote: FOR
I love this proposal, and I support exploring alternative mechanisms for rewarding delegates and contributors. I particularly appreciate the distinction made between these two groups, it’s something I’ve advocated for previously, and seeing it reflected here is definitely a step in the right direction.
I love the auto peer monitoring concept, which aligns well with Ostrom’s principles (I’m an Ostrom Maxi) and avoids the need for a lot of oversight using more of a coordinape approach.
I don’t like the idea of NO admin… We’ll need some form of program management, and I’d love to see a budget to expand AI assistance capabilities for this. While I recognize we’re not yet at the point where AI can fully automate this work, I think it can help a lot… if this passes I’d like to see OpCo involved in the program management in a more active way, supporting iterative improvement.
I think the model is simple and clear, we will need to tweak the numbers of course, but thats ok… It’s so great that this is coming from the community and not an AAE, we should encourage more grassroots efforts from outside our inner circles, this is probably 30% of the reason I want to support this proposal, it’s good enough to work, and we should have bias in favor of proposals that come from the community IMO.
Thank you Paulo for the great proposal, I doubt it passes but it really should, and has my support.