Discussing Market scheme

Start with the Current specifications and Problems sections, then read issues #41 and #46 and the linked DIP41 comment. The issue is a discussion rather than an implementation task; progress would require an agreed direction for the Market scheme and a clearly scoped proposal or DIP.

Anyone who wants to participate in the following DIP discussions is encouraged to read this issue first.

• #41
• #46

Multiple DIPs are surrounding the Market scheme, and determining them early helps reduce protocol uncertainty. Now I would like to wrap up multiple DIPs and sort out the issues.

Current specifications

Market is a mechanism for authenticating assets (such as GitHub repositories). The Dev Protocol increases the inflation rate as the number of assets increases. Its inflation rate decreases with more staking.

Developers can propose a market. The proposed Market will be activated by being passed through on-chain governance.

Problems

1. "Inflation Rate Explosion": If a Market has a mechanism to increase assets very easily (for example, authenticate tweets as assets), an inflation rate explosion can occur. (If that happens, users can lower the inflation rate by proposing a new Policy.)
2. "Inflation Rate Conflict": The inflation rate is shared even if there are two completely different Markets. Increasing staking for one market will reduce the inflation rate for the other market.

DIPs

DIP41

Resolves "inflation rate conflict."

Markets are categorized by groups called "sectors," and inflation rates are encapsulated by sector. Encapsulated inflation is called "native APY."

However, sectors with low assets have low inflation rates, which raises the question of economic rationality for staking for new sectors.

See the comment that organizes the advantages and disadvantages.

DIP46

Resolves "inflation rate explosion."

Fix the inflation rate cap and change it so that the number of assets does not affect the inflation rate.

Assuming a constant number of stakings, the inflation rate will not increase. Therefore, if the inflation rate is clearly at a value that should be corrected, users should use Policy Governance to correct it.

DIP46 conflicts with DIP41. This is because the rate must be a singleton to prevent an "inflation rate explosion." Therefore, DIP41 and DIP46 have an exclusive relationship with each other.

Below is an idea that hasn't become DIP yet.

Plan-C

Purchasing inflation rate. (Can be combined with DIP41)

The concept is to increase the inflation rate by burning DEV if users decide that the authenticated assets have a higher value.

Combined with DIP41, both "inflation rate explosion" and "inflation rate competition" can be resolved.

---

I welcome you to understand the problem and suggest better ideas.