I came in at the back-half of the call, I may have missed parts of the discussion in the beginningā¦ but I caught the discussion on HOP incentives at the end.
Specific to this RFC - I support as stands, but if others push to adjust the HOP incentives (reduce / eliminate / set an end date too) I would vote āForā in that case as well. I think realistically the main goal should be to get projects on the HOP protocol, so Iām not going to blow up this type of value add over should we provide X or Y HOP. I also do think credit is due to MAGIC for bringing their own incentives to the table as well, and Iāve been more ready to show support for projects that do this in general. If Iām not mistaken the 12k HOP per month is the same rate as rETH (who also brought their own capital to the project), so itās not an unreasonable amount given that was passed.
Forward-thinking, I do believe that some type of methodology for HOP incentives is a great idea. So I look forward to discussion on what that looks like. I think this and the rETH bridge will be a good starting basis for the discussions.
I do acknowledge that idea is being born out of this specific RFC. So I donāt necessarily want to āpunishā them for happening to be the protocol that triggered the discussion. Hench why Iām open to support as presented. One of my thoughts is if these incentives should have a time limit, as I think the long term goal is use these subsidies early but ween off them as HOP matures. But with the rETH bridge already passed without one Iād hate to create that ideological split among two similiar HIPs and tack that on to this Snapshot.