One key aspect stands out to me that could be a big reputational risk to Pangolin.
This will also become a direct risk to PNG token holders if not properly resolved executed - all it takes is one FUD so we don’t wanna have lose ends at all. It’s all in the administrative setup and constitution of the board.
The key issue and solutions are expressed here: Pangolin Tokenomics Improvement Proposal - #47 by Kinetic and proposed a deeper AMA )
Note: Please read Hari’s full proposal first if you can. Everything in there is great, just this aspect could end up becoming a little trojan loophole.
Summary of the concerns (seriously, I highly suggest you read Hari’s full tokenomics update first, then the full concerns):
a/ On one hand, I’m hundred percent for the treasury allocation and sustainable ways of improving rewards for community. This is fantastic for driving TVL if done right and knowing you guys, I know it will.
b/ However very important (I.E. WITH REGARD TO FOUNDATION), on the aspects of control, accountability and recourse to the community I think the gravity of this proposal is a little to weighty to pass off as just another update.
A lot of things need to be clarified regarding the foundation and what novel solutions the core team / core members will come up with for preserving community underpinnings and decentralised administration of Pangolin.
As well as creativity in the legal department (give Sabo my good tidings!) for administrative instruments to be used for running a Pangolin trust or foundation via proxy vote on critical matters.
On this matter, I’m hundred percent against overly bureaucratised processes - so articles/rules of the will need to clarify key matters and expense threshold for which community must vote.
However, absolute power corrupts - thus, accountability and recourse to the community on control is a non-negotiable.
REQUEST- COULD WE GET A PROGRESS UPDATE FROM THE TEAM THIS WEEK?
It’s been a few months since community voted team in.
Can we get a quick update from the team on the current administrative setup of Pangolin vs. the proposed foundation’s setup? That as well the current status of the balance of the multi-sig, in light of new need for foundation funding (proposed).
Because I feel like understanding where we are currently will give us better perspective on whether or not this proposal should pass - and will inform what solutions we can come up with as a community to refine it’s execution and setup so it’s no longer a reputational risk to Pangolin or threat to the PNG holders
Now Before You Run Off FUDDing…
Now I normally don’t post on here cos idealogical principles can be divisive / even construed as FUD. So I hate posting those types of things on an open forum. But this is pretty major for Pangolin’s long game.
Reason being there’s great risk due to lack of clarity of the Foundation aspects of the new proposal.
How much exactly will the allocation to foundation of the proposed 13%? Why is the multi-sig not enough? Since Pango is 100% community owned, what are the methods setup by the team where the community may elect / proxy elect the board.
This has seemingly gone unnoticed by most but could undermine community involvement control eventually, since once legal structured are setup they’re pretty much baked in except new ones / auxiliaries are established.
Also if there’s this big an allocation so quickly, isn’t there also the risk of Pangolin’s adminitstrative instruments and it’s staff becoming a legal target for regulators? I mean this will of course depend on where current entity for simple operations is situated, but it remains that 13% is simply too juicy for some ambitious AG or fiscal regulator not to go after.
(Team, seriously please provide an update well in advance of the tokenomics governance proposal).
Absolute power as they say, corrupts. That goes for regulators as well as vesting too much into an as yet unclarified foundation whose board constitution will certainly change over time from the people we know and trust.
A More Balanced Perspective - Simply A Crucial Fail-Safe For Protection…
Now to be clear, I actually know quite a number of the Pango team and pretty well too! I genuinely don’t think we have nefarious participants in there.
That said, as newer people come and go over the next four years who may not have the same love for the project, it’s important that we have checks and balances baked right into corporate structure and administrative instruments so that community retains control and recourse for accountability.
This is a crucial fail-safe.
Once again this is not FUD, just something important that was worth making my first post.
Rest assured it will all be clarified as admins reply in a couple of hours and we’ll figure out solutions to address the concerns addressed comprehensively.
Hopefully we can have the AMA for this ‘foundation aspect’ and administrative / long term price impact of the tokenomics update before the week ends.
Enjoy your week