I‘ve been following this since creation and i agree and disagree with a lot of argumentations however the proposal does not match my viewpoint especially how its communicated.
The proposal was driven by further decentralisation of the ecosystem. Fundamentally thats a great idea. Indeed.
- Lido or more precise LDO is lacking decentralisation in general. Frist time I heard about LDO was when Banteg said „a good fried of him is building a project“. Since then, the distribution of LDO never seems to be equally shared between „closer insider members and the broad mass of people/community“. The wallet structure never changed tremendously. Few wallets control LDO
- Keeping this in mind I ask myself, how a further venture capitalist as investor add any specific value to broader decentralisation. In other words, another whale concentrating the LDO token distribution even further.
- Beside selling such a big amount of LDO to a VC, the terms and conditions are solely in favour of the buyer. 1 year cliff starting in midst of a bear market will end up in a massive chunk of capital at the next cycle which will further lead to further participant (besides all this giga wallets) looking for a huge amount of exit liquidity. It feels like the intension is towards profitability for dragonfly rather than distribution of a token for more decentralisation and thus stability and diversity. Speaking about cliff, a 4y+ cliff seems to be more appropriate IF this proposal should continue to exist in general.
- Since we are in a bear market, the VC can also TWAP buy the token on the open market while LDO holders can decide whether selling to him or holding their tokens to support the projects further decentralisation.
- To make it clearer, if the team would support the community rather than a single VC, I would propose selling those tokens to the community e.g. another pre-mine event for stETH holders or a capped amount of tokens via sale in an IDO or similar.
- Lastly I would like to cite SBF when he made clear, in crypto, revenue isn’t the metric to focus on - its profitability (of the project, not a VC). Since the overall global economy is tense, having some more tokens in the treasury will help Lido to survive in the next years by selling those treasury tokens on the open market at way higher prices. So selling now will end up in massive opportunity costs for the project and thus the community!
The reason why im against any of these proposals rn is, the crypto market seems to be something which it isn’t: a place where the community (mass of participants) have „equal“ rights to decide the direction and health of a project. This is urgently important since crypto gained an even more shady light since all happenings in the past.
Decentralised autonomous organisation, not centralised organisation.