Thanks for writing this and putting the effort into taking up the discussion. I think this is an important topic to be addressed in the long run.
Before I get back to the answers just a few things that I would like to clarify:
I guess the current relation between XIO and FLASH should be part of DYOR. This includes that people investing in FLASH should know how it relates to XIO.
Noteworthy, FLASH is a bit of a special case, because it is the first project that’s realized and what is more, it is not an external start-up porject. Therefore, the interdependence is stronger.
Due to what I explained above I am altogether fine with the relation as is. Calling it micromanagement sounds wrong to me. Given the recent discussions we are having I am rather under the impression that the core team is unfortunately micromanaged by the community…
While I am supporting the underlying notion to somehow increase independence for FLASH, I jut wanted to be transparent that I do not consider the current relation as unhealthy or unfair. To me this question is a lot about discussing a good set-up for external start-ups incubated by Blockzero.
200,000 following Umar’s suggestion.
I think the token’s should be managed by the project’s growth manager since the funds should be exclusively used for growth purposes. These purposes should be discussed and agreed to by the liquidity providers of the project. If there is no project specific growth manager, then XIO’s coming growth manager should manage the funds accordingly.
Suggest LPs and perhaps long term stakers (>180 days).
Yes. While I am positive that there are growth tactics that could be achieved better if the project does not have to go through a flashstake it only has advantages to restrict them to just this use. Obviously payouts should be used at full liberty.
After a total staking period and Flash sum is accumulated the funds need to be returned.
Limit to growth investments that are in line with the growth tactics the community approved.
I think it addresses a necessary topic. I would have preferred a different approach. The proposal itself is under the impression that XIO should fix something so that FLASH feels more independent. I am a strong believer in achieving independence by your own and here are some alternatives that I would have preferred:
Long term stake of a year and 10% payout is contributed by the stakers to the FCF.
Adding a minor slippage to Staking or LP mining that goes to the FCF.
Long term stakes or LP providers give 10% of what they may gain through a price increase.
Deflating flash that is idle for a month (balance >2000Flash, can be less once the gas price decreased or Flash increased)