[Signal Request] Adjust the Surplus Buffer (March/April 2021)

This signal ends soon, and it is looking very close. I’d encourage everyone to consider compromise options with the goal of having something reach a clear majority.

Those favouring only 50 million or 70 million might consider voting 60 million as well, for example.

Remember that you can vote for multiple options!

4 Likes

Yesssss, we should compromised and meet me half-way at 60M!!!

Or, we can have fun staying poor with the SB at 30M.

Imagine a lending facility with less than 1% of it’s outstanding balance sheet in cash :laughing:

Recipe for ______________.

EDIT: Just moved it down to 60M. Let’s go!!!

1 Like

Come on folks 200 basis points needed to get to 60M! We need 50%. Let’s get it!

@Doo Sir consider deleting your 30M poll and vote for 60M.
@iammeeoh if you like the SB at 50M, you gotta Love It at 60M!
@g_dip we gonna need a lot of DAI to pay that Talented BD Team you created–let’s do 60M SB and call it a day? :slight_smile: shall we?

6 Likes

ok, updated! :rofl:

2 Likes

I’m confused. Isn’t the idea of trying to maintain 2% in reserve (which I’m not sure I agree with) going to divert funds away from investing in other activities… Like core units or burning?

Or are we intending to use the funds in the surplus buffer to fund the DAO?

1 Like

Both. 60M DAI is a meet-me-half-way community deal–the reality is, we should be at 80M-100M to to both comfortably. Hopefully that resonates and you’ll help us with 60M.

Not sure what others here think? Maybe some input from others with regards to your question will help the community come to an meet-me-half-way deal.

So the intention is that core units will be funded from the Surplus Buffer? I would change my vote if that’s the case. I thought it was strictly going to be idle capital that actually took away from reinvesting in the DAO.

The vat is the catch all for everything and the SB is just a trigger point for FLAP ignition. So until we have another strategy for this surplus everything comes from the same place.

1 Like

Let’s go @alexis !!! Please cancel your Vote for 50M and choose 60M? Help your brothers and sisters out–we All gotta eat from the Surplus Buffer :slight_smile:

Seriously, can you meet us at 60M? If you like 70M, and 80M then you gotta love 60M

T-Nice @tbone and J-Cut @Jiecut can you also help out? Trying to reach Quorum at 60M–can you please delete your 50M vote? :pray:t4:

2 Likes

Loving the energy @ElProgreso :slight_smile:

As things stand now 60M is the only option with a majority in the first poll, but there are still a few days to go. So I’d encourage people to continue to consider compromise.

The second poll is looking closer, with both 25% and 0% burn having a majority. Perhaps some consideration should be made there? It would be fantastic if the community could come to consensus on a single majority option.

4 Likes

I mean, if 0% and 25% ends up like this, would it make sense to consider something like 12.5% as a compromise?

4 Likes

Last time we had a successful onchain vote even with IRV. I don’t mind repeating this

PS: 80MM with 0% burn is still the right choice :wink:

4 Likes

Hey E-Pro, I have a vote for 60M already. :slight_smile:

1 Like

@Jiecut u the man J! Thank you for always keeping it real!

3 Likes

Unfortunately being open to this sort of compromise opens up ambiguity over how Facilitators should set the compromise value.

In this case, those voting at 0% may not want or accept a compromise value because their reasons for voting 0% may not be related to the relative amount of burn. They may be opposed to burn on a general level, or disagree with the proposed method.

If the leading options were 25% and 50% this would be safer, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to allow governance facilitators to choose compromise options in the general case. It feels like it could be easy to abuse or easy to just get it wrong.

5 Likes

Some people are voting for 0% burn and 30M buffer. I’m not sure how those votes should count if the majority will be for increasing the buffer.

4 Likes

With a 5% earnings yield (before expenses), allocating 25% towards burning sounds great. Historically that’s quite high. It’s a nice mix towards even healthier reserves and also some burning at an attractive valuation.

Anyways as I said before, there’s also the option of another poll in the future to start burning a portion of earnings before we reach a 60M surplus.

(Regarding the on-chain vote. I think it’ll be qualified to do IRV with [email protected]%, [email protected]%, and No Change)

5 Likes

Yep (assuming both 0% and 25% have >50% of the non-abstain votes when the poll ends)

I am a little concerned that we won’t be able to guarantee the 25% though. We’re going to take out some fairly large chunks when the second set of Core Units is approved.

3 Likes

If suck from the VAT before we fill the SB we might actually see no burning at all…

closed the polls, thanks everybody for participating. Special shout-out to @ElProgreso for keeping everybody engaged here.

will prepare the PR for the onchain poll now which will very likely go live on 2021-04-05T16:00:00Z

5 Likes