Paulo Fonseca's application to the House of Stake Head of Governance role

[paulofonseca]

Hey @KYSb_b thank you for your questions!

I’ve been following both of your proposals as well as the HOT DAO proposal and vote in June.

@KYSb_b

Do you plan to initiate an update of NEAR’s monetary policy, or support the existing proposal by presenting your own vision and possible steps for introducing new economic parameters into the network?

I believe that as Head of Governance it wouldn’t really be adequate for me to initiate proposals that don’t concern the meta governance aspects of House of Stake.

I do think however that NEAR monetary policy should be a major focus of our future governance efforts, as it is stated as the first goal in the House of Stake Mandate here.

I’m also more concerned about the legitimacy needed to enact such a decision, in a fair way. The previous vote had incredible participation despite the challenges it faced, which kind of sets a precedent of needed governance participation for a future vote in this matter. It would be strange if an inflation reduction proposal is approved with way less $NEAR supporting it, than the 255M $NEAR that supported it in the HOT DAO vote last June.

@KYSb_b

If you were to choose three main priorities for improving the network’s economy, which areas would you focus on first, and why?

In short, new revenue streams from NEAR verticals that have found product-market fit. Namely, NEAR Intents.

@KYSb_b

In your view, what measures could help protect validators and stakers during potential tokenomics changes, to maintain a balance between profitability and long-term stability?

The options in your proposal seem sensible, but I also think it would be better to unbundle the validator support mechanics, from the inflation reduction part. I think first the community should decide if it wants to reduce inflation or not, and how to do it, and if so, then the community should decide what kind of validator support programs could be created.