mirror of https://github.com/zcash/zips.git
Apply suggestions from code review
Co-authored-by: Daira-Emma Hopwood <daira@jacaranda.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
74875878e6
commit
c9d533f128
|
@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ in a future ZIP in order to make these funds available for funding grants to
|
||||||
ecosystem participants.
|
ecosystem participants.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The proposed lockbox addresses significant issues observed with ZIP 1014
|
The proposed lockbox addresses significant issues observed with ZIP 1014
|
||||||
[#zip-1014]_, such as regulatory risks, inefficiencies in funding organizations
|
[#zip-1014]_, such as regulatory risks, inefficiencies due to funding of organizations
|
||||||
instead of projects, and centralization. While the exact disbursement mechanism
|
instead of projects, and centralization. While the exact disbursement mechanism
|
||||||
for the lockbox funds is yet to be determined and will be addressed in a future
|
for the lockbox funds is yet to be determined and will be addressed in a future
|
||||||
ZIP, the goal is to employ a decentralized mechanism that ensures community
|
ZIP, the goal is to employ a decentralized mechanism that ensures community
|
||||||
|
@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ funds. The alternatives presented here are intended to address the following:
|
||||||
3. **Centralization Concerns**: The current model centralizes decision-making
|
3. **Centralization Concerns**: The current model centralizes decision-making
|
||||||
power within a few organizations, contradicting the decentralized ethos of
|
power within a few organizations, contradicting the decentralized ethos of
|
||||||
blockchain technology. Traditional organizational structures with boards and
|
blockchain technology. Traditional organizational structures with boards and
|
||||||
executives introduce a single point of failure and limit community
|
executives introduce single points of failure and limit community
|
||||||
involvement in funding decisions.
|
involvement in funding decisions.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
4. **Community Involvement**: The current system provides minimal formal input
|
4. **Community Involvement**: The current system provides minimal formal input
|
||||||
|
@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ Requirements
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
2. **Regulatory Considerations**: The allocation of funds should minimize
|
2. **Regulatory Considerations**: The allocation of funds should minimize
|
||||||
regulatory risks by avoiding direct funding of specific organizations. The
|
regulatory risks by avoiding direct funding of specific organizations. The
|
||||||
design should ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations to
|
design should enable and encourage compliance with applicable laws and regulations to
|
||||||
support the long-term sustainability of the funding model.
|
support the long-term sustainability of the funding model.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Non-requirements
|
Non-requirements
|
||||||
|
@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ pool.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Some of the alternatives described below do not specify a termination height
|
Some of the alternatives described below do not specify a termination height
|
||||||
for the funding streams they propose. In these cases, the termination height
|
for the funding streams they propose. In these cases, the termination height
|
||||||
is set to `u32::MAX_VALUE`. A future network upgrade that alters the
|
is given as "no end height". A future network upgrade that alters the
|
||||||
maximum possible block height MUST also alter these termination heights.
|
maximum possible block height MUST also alter these termination heights.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Alternatives
|
Alternatives
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue