Jake mentioned to me a scenario I’m quite familiar with:
They’re funded in ions, if they sell ions the price of ion will go down. So they’re not selling them, but this leaves them short on money to develop ibcx, which then leaves them short on team members to develop ibcx.
I’m going to leave the proposal as it is, because it is basically stuck and that probably isn’t worth the ion emissions, but I also want to request that the community have a think on this.
Vote options
Yes to formally request that ion dao return all ions with msgfundcommunitypool
No to take no action
Abstain to Express no opinion but contribute to quorum, supporting whichever side is winning
Veto to burn the deposit on this proposal And contribute to a veto tally which causes the proposal to fail if 1/3rd is reached
Oh wow, I thought the funding had stopped already since the payment was so long ago.
If the team isn’t working on this anymore, then this is a clear yes, and the ION DAO needs to either find a new development team to continue IBCX or change direction.
If the ION DAO is to continue, it should transition to the same model as SAIL by deploying on DAODAO with built-in clawback/veto rights from Osmosis governance.
Agree that the team has basically abandoned IBCX/ION DAO (while still getting paid and choosing to pursue other projects???), but is there even any sense in clawing it back? What would that do to the value of $ION? What will the Osmosis CP do with it? Is the idea to convert it back into a memecoin again?
To me, the value or meaning of ION has been completely severed from Osmosis and there is little reason to try to salvage it.
I would instead recommend to the ION stakers that they demand the supply to be either airdropped amongst them, as compensation fo suffering substantial losses as the team continues to “pays itself around $25,000 per month”, or (ideally) transferred to a competent team. A clawback to the community pool would likely spell the end of any hope of any real value coming from ION (if that is even possible anymore).
One thing to take into account is that slowly but surely the exceptional position for IBCX in the Osmosis ecosystem is also reduced.
So the big question remains indeed if we want to be associated with ION as native asset, or finally start treating it like any other asset who just has to deliver to receive special perks. I am all ears for the latter.
With respect to the funds. I think @bananadao is right. The community members themselves have to step up in this case and decide what they want to do with it. The transfer as performed in prop #375 (Mintscan) kinda signalled the ION community and all subsequent products have to fend for themselves.
I empathize a lot with the teams situation but also think that since work isn’t being done and value is being transferred, that this prop is likely the right direction.
I’m asking if you’d do it, more as a temperature check for the community sentiment than as a request to make the prop.
There’s no veto mechanism like with SAIL for example.
So yes, it would have to be a text proposal request, which if not followed (or countered by a restructuring of the ION DAO and proposal to confirm), would have to be a Juno Prop 16 situation
The forum doesn’t really fly as a poll for what I have seen until now.
There are some passionate people here trying to do gods work with prepping governance related topics, but the majority of the community doesn’t visit the forum for this (unless incentivized as I have seen happening on other chains…)
So my initial reaction was similar to this comment in the Ion Governance Working Group telegram channel
But upon further discussion and thought I think I do agree with the premise of this proposal as ION tried and experiment and it just didn’t work out.
There just isn’t any active participation anymore, from staker or dev, look at the last attempt by the Manythings team to generate rebalancing discussion the forum…post didn’t even get a single reply.
On top of that the DAO will essentially be under the control of the Manythings team because of their outside holdings.
They already have over 11% of the vote power with what they’ve staked and have another 5.5% holding…and that is just going to continue to expand as the remaining ~3k ION vest as the months roll by (vesting schedule).
