Ossify RATE (e.g. incrementally over 1-5yr) to prevent future malicious governance from collapsing the token.
As validators leave non-reward-rollups, the rollup becomes increasingly vulnerable to censorship attacks. I suggest either defaulting to based-sequencing, or triggering permanent based-sequencing based on L1 forced-inclusion usage (for non-reward-rollups).
I suggest a delay period after a vote has passed during which it can be aborted by a re-vote.
Is this just to prevent double-voting? Liquid derivative contracts otherwise obviate delay protections.
Refund the burn if the vote succeeds. To fund future protocol development an additional UPGRADE_REWARD could be paid out if successful (only for burn-upgrades) (like a dominant-assurance contract).
Provers are sophisticated actors and can purchase L1 congestion insurance out-of-band.
All vote-to-slash mechanisms are vulnerable to collusion. e.g. an L1 contract which pays out if targeted validators are slashed or if a prover is not slashed.
My largest concern is governance incompetence leading to a security vulnerability in the rollup.
I’d like to see:
- First class community support for non-reward-rollups
- Avoid ‘canonical’ terminology in favor of V1, V2, etc.
- Unified Address Standardization
- Economically incentivized security information
- A reward-subsidized security prediction market (perhaps with trustless settlement via an impossible-to-call function)
- SECURITY_AUDIT_REWARD, assigned to N addresses at proposal time, requiring majority sign-off
- Eventual ossification of all contracts