Note for New Users in the forum: If you do not have the necessary Trust level, Please post in this thread to request for a Trust level upgrade. It is needed for you to place a vote
This poll is part of a series of polls to determine the monetary policy/tokenomics of Firo with the upcoming halving.
Don’t forget to vote in the other two polls:
[Poll] Should Firo have a tail emission?
[Poll] Should Firo keep its halving schedule or should we revisit our emission curve?
With the upcoming halving, if no change happens, all the block rewards will go towards miners and masternodes 50/50. This would mean the cessation of the development and community fund and the project will then rely completely on contributors and donations. We did this intentionally to ensure there is a strong community mandate to extend/vary the Development fund instead of just grandfathering it in.
This poll does not decide the percentage of the block reward the development fund or community fund should have, but instead whether there should be one at all. The second round of polls would decide the exact percentage/amounts.
The pros of removing this is that the project truly becomes decentralized especially with the ongoing crackdowns on privacy coins.
However the cons is that it is likely that development would purely rely on volunteers and our existing core team be disbanded.
It is noted that other projects have either ossified and not required updates (such as Dogecoin) or have generous early adopters that have benefited from an accelerated emission for example Monero where much of the supply was emitted in the first two years which allows these people to donate back to the project.
From a purely selfish standpoint, this is the question that is most time sensitive as if the development fund is discontinued, I would need to give notice to the current team to start looking for other work rather than last minute pulling the plug.
Also given our small market cap, if development goes to a standstill, it is likely that some exchanges might delist us.
Another option is to instead have no development fund, but proceed purely through a ‘Grants Committee’ which I assume would be some expanded role of the Community Fund Committee which are elected from our community. This would technically allow continued funding for development while allowing greater decentralization.
The primary issues with this approach is ensuring motivated and skilled Committee members which likely need to be compensated for their time. The weakness of committees is generally ensuring a group of motivated people who understand the project well. Without it, committees often devolve into a lack of initiative and direction and in a best case scenario become reactive in nature. Our existing CFC members donate their time and effort but even so it’s often challenging to obtain votes.
Note: While optional, we strongly recommend writing the reason of how you voted to better understand the community sentiment.
Should Firo have a Development Fund and Community Fund?
- No community fund or developer fund (all goes to miners/masternodes)
- Maintain Community Fund and Developer Fund
- Only Developer Fund, no Community Fund
- Only Community Fund, no Developer Fund