Re: Working groups & Franchising
I believe the working groups approach and franchising are key drivers to scale crypto ecosystems but it has to be organized and communicated very well, i.e. you have core working groups with working group leaders (Strategy, Core tech, Dev/Integrations, Marketing, BD, Product) as well as occassional contributors, franchisees and new projects - that receive updates/support from core.
Dilution of token holders is one of the biggest sins in DeFi - Solana ecosystem taking this to the extreme. I like that the floating in RariCap is high and that dilution is not a problem today. Nonetheless, there is definitely an issue w/ attracting more quality people to contribute which means we need to get revenues up and a one-time dilution is absolutely required to have enough funds for (protocol growth &) attracting quality contributors long-term. In Yearn, we can see that the comparably large number of existing high-quality contributors was satisfied with the vesting package but it is not attracting many new people. Today, we could say it was a one-time money redistribution from outsiders to insiders.
Tokens are indeed more than currency, voting right, right on potential revenues - they are a coordination & incentive mechanism. I am in favor of supporting more value accrual to 1. core contributors, 2. occassional contributors, 3. long-term investors than 4. passive short-term speculators. This is a message that I would like to see all over the place at Rari Website, Discord, etc. as few investors and DeFi users understand that there is a much easier way to make money than speculation - contribution!
To be frank: This is pretty much a disaster. 50% dilution. Backdated. Original proposal on emissions and usage of funds (liquidity mining) are so bad that I would have left the community if I had been around back then. Adding my funds to the Rari treasury until core team & token holders find some usage for the funds is just as bad today.
Proposal Modification Suggestion
I support a one-time dilution of 10-20% as well as a small yearly inflation (though not a fan of the latter).
However, there needs to be a concrete usage for the funds and, as @Tetranode pointed out, current holders/contributors should be able to avoid dilution by opting-in to lockups & revenues or ecosystem contribution.
As we know that Fuse has great product-market fit and boosted rewards will be eaten by a few large holders and Yearn & Co, I personally see some value in attracting more deposits but don't want to see extensive, long-term incentives. I would love to first see a dedicated group create incentives that run 1-4 weeks for the different products and pools and to test how much is CAC, LTV, what makes users come back, etc. (Note: I very much assume that many more users would delegate funds today if they knew about the rates (e.g. AUM x3). This means, marketing spend should be up, not only liquidity spend)
Specifically, I'd favor paying working groups (leaders & contributors) stablecoins + high-performance (KPI) long-term options packages. And of course, these options packages should be renewed and improved for quality contributors.