I am in full support of diverting emissions to AZ. In fact, I would be willing to divert up to 50%. In addition, asking (or requiring) new devs who ask for large AZ to also receive a vested pillar (rather than a pay out) is a good idea that I support. Granting a vested pillar to a new dev will give them incentive to remain in the community and the dev will be knowledgable on how to run infra. I would limit one vested Pillar per dev.
The idea of granting a vested pillar to someone who actually does work, like a dev, is much easier to digest than giving one away to a rando we “hope” will help us due to their list of followers.
So in John’s case maybe his first request is 3AZs and the second request is a pillar. No special requirments or vesting. He earned it. He could revoke it after 1y like everyone else. But he could see it as valuable b/ the QSR required to launch is much higher than 150k QSR.
Just a thought, we could add another slider on pillar config for AZ replenishment and use on-chain governance to align on a minimum percent allowed so pillars have some flexibility and delegators can reward those who are more generous.
I propose diverting 10% of the total network emissions to AZ that will be deducted from delegators, stakers, Sentinels and Pillars that are not active (don’t run infra or vote - this will be harder to implement).
This comes at around ~500 ZNN and ~5000 QSR that will go into AZ every single day.
We will able to support around 3 projects per month. It’s not a lot, but it’s a very good start.
If we can come up with a sensible measurement method, it seems like one of the best ideas. 2 birds with 1 stone, encourage Pillars to be active while feeding AZ.
At first glance, it seems logical to measure by votes not cast for AZs from a given date. However, potential proposal spams on AZ after this point could lead to a situation where all Pillars are forced to cast unnecessary votes for malicious AZs all the time.
Also, once an AZ is accepted / rejected I don’t think more can vote on it, even if they want to. For anyone traveling it’s possible they will not be able to vote in time and will get unnecessarily penalized.
It might need to be a trailing metric that looks into the past. Or looks at trends over time. Like you must vote on 2 of 5 AZ on a rolling basis to be considered active. Something like that.
Great thread and agree with its urgency. All for replenishing AZ sustainably either by diverting a % of existing emissions or some other mechanism. This challenge is a classic example of the simplest solution likely being the most elegant.
Here’s a couple of stab at what Vested Pillar issuance could look like:
A slider that converts AZ request into a Pillar request (removes ZNN + QSR ask fields) in step 2 under Project Budget. All Pillar requests are automatically 2 phases. On Phase I payout, 15000 ZNN are automatically deposited into Pillar contract. On Phase II payout, the corresponding amount of QSR is sent and burned from AZ (alternatively bypass QSR burn altogether for a vested Pillar to preserve AZ funds). The submitter must define in their proposal what the criteria for completing the two phases are.
A slider that converts AZ request into a Pillar request (removes ZNN + QSR ask fields) in step 2 under Project Budget. Pillar is programmatically issued to submitter with “collect” and disassembly privileges revoked. There is one phase vote to unlock “collect” privileges and another for disassembly privileges.
Regarding sustainable AZ replenishment, just some more ideas here; some reaffirming what’s been posted:
10% of all emissions to AZ seems to be the cleanest and can always adjust the number - X%
“Wrap Tax” - Dynamically calculate an emissions yield back to AZ based on how much of total ZNN or QSR is wrapped. Ex. if 10% of total ZNN/QSR supply is wrapped, then 10% of emissions goes back to AZ
Same as #2 except based on outbound bridge volume (ex. ZNN → wZNN)
Instead of burning QSR for new Pillar erection; have it be donated to AZ.
Remove full or partial revocability of Sentinels. So instead of ability to disassemble completely for full amount, maybe the 5000 ZNN requirement goes directly to AZ. Or maybe 2500 ZNN + 25K QSR AZ donation to form the Sentinel with the rest being revocable. This also wouldn’t affect the original tokenomics like idea #4 would.
Higher token creation cost: Instead of 1 ZNN to create a token, make it 10 or more to go back to AZ. This probably wouldn’t move the needle much but if we can create a memecoin mania on NoM it adds up
Supernova transaction fees. Harder to enforce but any off-NoM activies (ex. BagSwap) has a transaction cost built-in to go back to AZ
Merge-mining incentives for AZ to recieve and hold BTC? More far-fetched and probably more complex to implement.
“Apathy Tax”: 35% yield tax on all Pillars with < 75% voting activity and their respective delegators.
Realistically how do we bring these discussions to life? Seems like we need a governance module or to bastardize AZ + a willing/available dev and although it’s (IMO) high priority I’m not sure it’s at the top of the backlog
If the community thinks this is important I would propose two things.
create a ZIP to change the voting mechanism (consistent with Sumamu’s proposal) to change the way voting works so we can really measure liveliness.
create a ZIP to change the way rewards are allocated. Build consensus around a ZIP and iterate it
1 and 2 both require development help. I’m sure the devs have no interesting in spending time building consensus. The community should do that. Once we have consensus around 1 & 2 the community should offer X ZNN / QSR to make the changes in order to entice a developer to code the changes and submit a PR.
I completely support diverting a good chunk of rewards across the board (delegation, staking, etc) to AZ. This will make the network ever more attractive for developers and sustainable for a long time. Great idea!