Thread by @AriannaSimpson

0/ We just released our opinion on the Zcash Founders' Reward (FR) debate. Here's a thread on our post in the @Zcash forum.

@zcash 1/ Quick background for those who aren't familiar with the FR discussion: The Zcash FR is a fund used to reward Zcash founders, early employees, and investors. FR funds are also used to fund ongoing development through the Electric Coin Company (ECC) & Zcash Foundation (ZF)

@zcash 2/ 20% of each block reward (BR) is paid to the FR.
But this is set to expire at the first BR halving in 2020, at which point all the BR will go to miners

@zcash 3/ Here's what the community agrees on:
1. The FR should be allowed to expire.
2. There should be a fund for ongoing development (Dev Fund).
3. We need great transparency and accountability.
4. More input from Zcash community is needed on how funds are distributed.

@zcash 4/ Here's what's still being debated:
1. How large should the Dev Fund be, and how should it be funded?
2. How will the Dev Fund be managed?
3. How will the Zcash community ensure transparency and accountability of the managers of the fund?

@zcash 5/ ASP's positioning most closely aligns with @avichal's proposal: bit.ly/30T7EzG.

@zcash @avichal 6/ Avichal’s key points are:
1. 20% of BR to Dev Fund.
2. 5-person council is created and has full authority over funds.
3. 1 seat on the council is for a miner rep. 1 seat is for a ZEC holder rep., and the remaining 3 seats can be anyone.
4. Elections every 2 years.

@zcash @avichal 7/ ASP rec's accepting Avichal’s proposal with two revisions:
1. In the initial allocation, 1 seat is reserved for an ECC rep., 1 seat is for a ZF rep, and 3 seats are for ZEC holders to vote on.
2. Staggered elections. Every 6 mo's, 1 seat should be put up for a vote.

@zcash @avichal 8/ Rationale for 20% of block reward for dev fund: this should be enough to fund development. Underfunding poses an existential threat to Zcash. Overfunding is slightly inefficient. Better to be safe than sorry.

@zcash @avichal 9/ Rationale for 5-person council: this strikes a good balance between centralization and decentralization. We get quick, flexible funding with broad representation of interests. A council of people is better than entities because they're easier to replace.

@zcash @avichal 10/ Rationale for 1 seat to ECC, 1 to ZF: Zcash is ECC's brainchild; they've amassed an R&D team that is 2nd to none. ZF has been huge in pushing adoption. We should welcome ECC & ZF leadership. If they fail expectations, we have an simple & formal way to replace them.

@zcash @avichal 11/ Rationale for removing miner seat: PoW miners are not necessarily aligned with the broader community. Ex. If Zcash finds PoS to be more secure/scalable, this will hurt miners, so the miner rep would vote no. However, miners can still hold ZEC and vote!

@zcash @avichal 12/ Rationale for staggered elections: This helps reduce governance volatility. In corporate governance, staggering is commonly used to avoid hostile takeovers. Also, one election at a time is more digestible for the community—leading to higher participation.

@zcash @avichal 13/ Our full comments can be found here. We welcome community feedback! forum.zcashcommunity.com/t/asp-founders…

@zcash @avichal 14/ Huge thanks to Autonomous Partners analyst @JacobPPhillips for helping research + put together our POV. He's new on twitter –– give him a follow! /END