As has come to light in the discussion, @maclane will be taking care of employment decisions and compensation, both of which increases my confidence in the proposal given that he himself is working pro bono.
As @sap has laid out, tLabs will be working closely with the DAO to set milestones, I consider this another requirement.
Adjusting the vesting schedule to more than 4 years would increase my confidence further. I believe we need incentives to be aligned with the long term success of T. I don’t think the “industry standards” of 4 years is really important, we want people to still care about the success of Threshold 5 or 10 years from now.
If it is a success, we can expect the price of T to increase as well, so the incentives are there to make sure it happens.
While I still consider the proposal and follow-up somewhat opaque, I’m willing to let that slide due to the understanding that crafting everything up-front is a very challenging, if not impossible task and because a restructuring of Threshold Network appears to be an inherent, perhaps urgent need given many of the challenges we face within Threshold Network and the DAO; in marketing, tech development, competition, lack of growth, price decrease and inflation.
TIP-92 by @maclane was met with a lot of resistance, however BitVM2 is one of several pieces that can directly lead to this puzzle being put together in a manner that makes sense. Maclane has a clear vision and I think it’s an important direction to look at, this proposal will ease the path for not just improved tokenomics, but essential value accrual.
There are no other proposals available that makes sense. I have confidence in both @sap and @maclane. After review, I now believe that the proposal is worthy of either abstain or yes vote.
I’m leaning yes, but have not made a final decision yet.
This makes sense to me.