Hi Doug,
I think fixing those inflation parameters to arbitrary and favorable-for-now values could set the network up for a possible re-change in the future, which would render the whole effort pointless and make it lose credibility. It’s not fine to make arbitrary changes to just make them serve the way it is needed for current conditions. Those parameters should dynamically depend on something. Maybe on market-cap, maybe on total revenue, or something else that is an indication of revenue conditions. At the end of the day, inflation should just be enough to sustain operators. Delegators, in theory, are delegating to earn Ether fees from the network (dividends) and so inflation rewards should only go to orchestrators; and be just enough to make them continue their operation if fees are not enough.
So;
- Could maybe someone calculate the average operating expenses of an operator?
- And then calculate how much more is needed for them when you subtract the average Ether earnings?
Also, I understand ether and lpt prices are volatile, so inflation parameters would be made highly dynamic taking those into account as well. In fact let’s scratch those targetBondingRate and inflationChange parameters altogether and have the number of daily printed lpt be calculated individually for each round depending on fees of that round in dollars. It’d be equal to (fees in dollars-avg.expenses in dollars)/avg.lpt price over that round.
As a delegator, I’m willing to give up inflationary rewards and just be okay with Ether fees (which is basically 0 - but that’s not the point) because this would at least make the idea of Livepeer defendable in theory. Otherwise this project is looking more and more like a well-intentioned but failed project simply because there is not enough demand but that it is printing money to keep itself going.
Thank you.
