mirror of https://github.com/status-im/swarms.git
92 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
92 lines
2.8 KiB
Markdown
|
---
|
||
|
|
id: 275-recyclable-fee
|
||
|
|
title: Recyclable Fee
|
||
|
|
status: draft
|
||
|
|
created: 2018-06-02
|
||
|
|
category: core
|
||
|
|
lead-contributor: Ricardo Guilherme Schmidt
|
||
|
|
contributors:
|
||
|
|
-
|
||
|
|
exit-criteria: no
|
||
|
|
success-metrics: no
|
||
|
|
clear-roles: no
|
||
|
|
future-iteration: no
|
||
|
|
roles-needed:
|
||
|
|
- QA
|
||
|
|
- PM
|
||
|
|
- UXR
|
||
|
|
- Designer
|
||
|
|
okrs:
|
||
|
|
-
|
||
|
|
-
|
||
|
|
---
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Preamble
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Idea: 275-recyclable-fee
|
||
|
|
Title: Ricardo Guilherme Schmidt
|
||
|
|
Status: Draft
|
||
|
|
Created: 2018-06-02
|
||
|
|
Requires: 172-topic-democracy
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Summary
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Instead of Burning fees, user lock them in a contract where a democracy can choose where user can destine them, such as approved Status Open Bounties.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Swarm Participants
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- Lead Contributor: Ricardo Guilherme Schmidt
|
||
|
|
- Contributor:
|
||
|
|
- QA:
|
||
|
|
- PM:
|
||
|
|
- UX:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Product Overview
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Burning fees are used when there is no rightful beneficiary for the destination of funds, however in a fixed supply economy will ultimately lead to a failed model because of excessive deflation of economy.
|
||
|
|
Recycling fees to approved destinations by Status Democracy can lead to a self funded DAO through its own fees.
|
||
|
|
This fees should not be introduced without reason, instead they are only introduced when there is no other way of achieving an social-economic feature, for example, a curation board where users can pay to increase a determined rating but there is no rightful destination of this funds in an decentralized organization.
|
||
|
|
Future features of Status Network, such as "Emoji Score Board" will send fees to recycling.
|
||
|
|
Users that have their locked fees will be able to select where that fees can go, therefore deciding by themselves which features to be implemented in Status are more important.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### User Stories
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Users have low incentives for donating his own funds to Status Open Bounty.
|
||
|
|
While using Status Network, users sometimes have to pay to change the state of network, but that funds are kept in control of user.
|
||
|
|
Users now have locked funds which they can only spend in approved Open Bounties, and they have free time to decide which one they want to support.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Requirements & Dependencies
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
172-topic-democracy voting app for deciding where the fees can be destined.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Security and Privacy Implications
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Pseudo-anonymous addresses can have public behavior tracked.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Dates
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Minimum Viable Product
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Goal Date:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Description: Dapp listing approved bounties and enable to send part or total user locked funds.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Iteration 1
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Goal Date:
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Description: MVP + Voting app controls approved bounties.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Success Metrics
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Status Open Bounty gets funded by users of the platform through the Recycle system.
|
||
|
|
25% of locked fees are recycled within a month.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Exit criteria
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Launch recycling Status App in Mainnet with at least one source of fees.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Copyright
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
Copyright and related rights waived
|
||
|
|
via [CC0](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/).
|