DAO Funded P-Rep

Hey everyone!

I wanted to discuss an idea for setting up a p-rep that would represent the Balanced DAO on the Icon network and add to the DAO Fund.

The idea is:

  • Allocate DAO Funds to cover costs of setting up and registering a p-rep on the Icon network
  • Choose a team of trusted DAO members to run the p-rep and represent the DAO’s interest in votes.
  • Use all ICX stored on the platform to vote for this P-rep
  • ICX earned by the p-rep would go directly to the DAO Fund, minus some reserved for costs related to maintaining the server

If I am not mistaken, there is around ~52,000,000 ICX currently on the platform (As Collateral, LPs, DAO Fund, Emergency Fund). This would make the Balanced DAO one of the top P-Reps on the Icon Network and provide over $200,000 a month for the DAO Fund (based on current numbers, which I understand will change later on in Icon 2.0).

To put this into perspective, we added an average of $650,000 a month to the DAO Fund over the last 3 months, so this would be a significant addition.

Any thoughts or comments?

As far as I know, the intention is to make BALN control the votes of the collateral like OMM. In that case it gives more value to BALN and gives BALN stakers control over the votes. In that case I believe there is less reason to run a node like that.

Additionally, AFAIK, after the rework of ICX network rewards, the rewards to P-Reps will be far lower which makes this a poor time to invest in this direction I think.

Yeah, I believe that is the current plan, but to my understanding it will require development time to adapt the system from OMM and won’t be started until after bBaln is finished.

Setting up a p-rep is something that could be outsourced to the community to save developer time and implemented relatively quickly. Maybe even a current p-rep could be brought on board to serve this function. The devs would just need to change where the votes are pointing.

The downside to this method is that BALN stakers wouldn’t control where the votes are allocated, but it also ensures that maximum value goes to the DAO Fund which can then be used to grow the platform (and benefits BALN stakers indirectly). I guess the questions is: Do BALN Stakers benefit more from directing their votes or from a larger DAO Fund? Personally, I believe more money to the DAO Fund is better in the long term.

I guess it does depend a lot on just how much the rewards are lowered. I think even at 40-50% of current rewards it would still be worth it though (that’s based on the tweet showing that inflation is going from 6%->4% and being split more ways). Do you think rewards would be even lower than that?

I don’t like turning Balanced into a pure profit P-Rep like Binance and having all participants lose the ability to vote. This damages the delegated voting system and is in fact likely the reason for the change, which is something I believe the community strongly wanted.
If we can choose P-Reps still, then sure, but I think people will be voting in their own best interests and supporting the projects they believe in the most.
This will also seriously harm any P-Reps with positive impact onto the ecosystem.

The parts I am against is

  1. Forcing the the votes towards the Balanced P-Rep
  2. Forcing a huge amount of votes to a single P-Rep
  3. I can’t find any concrete P-Rep information for the change, it seems wise to at least wait and see what its like before taking the risk.
  4. The whitepaper currently describes the ability distribution of votes, now that is not written in stone, but that is a functionality at least I value moderately.
  5. Its all well and good to say trusted community, and run well, etc.etc. In the end theres no way to have any accountability. For P-Reps the way to have accountability is to be able to vote for someone else…

I echo what Arch said about the voting power in the not so far future going to BALN (bBALN) stakers, hence not worth the effort.

Furthermore currently this voting power is going to the Balanced builders and has pushed several into the top 22, where they belong. My hope is for BALN stakers to continue support the builder teams because it is in the best interest for their BALN holdings, however we have just recently seen IAM now also sharing their P-rep rewards for OMM voting rights delegation.

My point, we should focus efforts to make sure the builder teams of these platforms continue to get these delegations. I would even go so far as to propose a minimum fixed percentage to go to these teams when voting power eventually is turned to bBALN stakers.

I know people will say “Why, the builders are rewarded with BALN already”. My answer to that is that I feel very strongly these teams need voting power on ICX governance as well. These are our main builders and belong in the top 22, not just for more funding through P-rep rewards, but mainly to govern the ICON blockchain.

I agree with you guys that it would be better for the overall Icon ecosystem to allow BALN Stakers to control the votes. My idea was more geared towards maximum profits for the platform but I admit choosing votes is more desirable overall.

I still would like to eventually see a Balanced funded P-Rep to give the DAO itself a voice on the Icon network. Monthly disbursements from the DAO Fund to the team running it could ensure that it is well-run and acting in the best interest of Icon and Balanced. Some kind of IAM P-Rep style profit return where 50% goes back to voters and 50% goes to the Balanced DAO Fund would help it get voters and benefit the platform (this is all assuming it is worthwhile in the new system).

I disagree with reserving votes for the P-Reps of the early contributors. As you mentioned, there is already a method in place to compensate them (BALN Worker Tokens). They will be able to stake their holdings and direct votes just like everyone else. This also provides another incentive for the developers to hold and stake their tokens.

Anyways, I understand we can’t do much until the P-Rep changes are known and set in stone. I was just curious what others thought.

Oh I am not against a Balanced P-Rep at all. Just against forcing votes to it, and think we may as well also see what the changes are like first

I didn’t read up on the entire thread, but the primary issue I see with this is that a P-Rep itself can’t actually be a DAO unfortunately. Somebody needs to sign up for AWS, somebody needs to charge the AWS on their credit card, somebody would need to be trusted with the rewards, somebody needs to actually upgrade the P-Rep software when necessary and somebody would be taking significant regulatory risk for doing this role. That’s my 2 cents, but of course, anybody could launch a p-rep that contributes to Balanced if they wanted to.