CIP-0106: Add QCP Group as a Super Validator (weight 5.0)

• Eligible Burn Criteria: We think this is vague in ways that can lead to confusion/disagreement when milestones and ongoing commitments are reviewed.  As we've learned, its best to clarify any points that could be interpreted multiple ways at time of CIP rather than afterwards.
  • In (4) the inclusion of 3rd party CP burn can create a situation where two parties both with CIPs that are activity based (volume or burn) are claiming the same activity for their own milestones.  For instance, two SVs conduct a bi-lateral derivatives trade with frequent margin management leading to burn.  The same could be said for SVs that have deployed apps where another SV is a participant in that app.  We don't believe double counting is appropriate but we also recognize why attributing burn via 3rd party app could be in scope.  High level, we believe burn should be attributed pro-rata to the relevant parties.
  • We believe that eligible burn or general activity should be specifically done by QCP or the "Proposer" of the CIP and conducted from a list of owned addresses provided by the Proposer to the Accountability Committee to track the milestone metrics to.  Where the burn is conducted from a 3rd party address we are open to including it provided it could be definitively allocated to a party once (even if only a pro-rata portion).  
  • We recognize this could become resource-intensive to monitor for as as more of these CIPs are drafted, but also believe this is necessary to (i) ensure the Proposer owns / is responsible for their activity and (ii) avoid double or even triple counting if multiple different Proposers interact with one another on-chain.
    
    
• Sustainment Requirement:
  • Because the milestone criteria is approved on a point-in-time aggregate activity snapshot rather than a rate of change, we would like to specify the terminology and calculation.  To be specific, the "reference rate" would be defined as the per 2-quarter rate of proposed activity, calculated as:
    • reference rate = (aggregate milestone acceptance criteria activity amount ) / ( milestone approval date - CIP approval date )
  • I also believe that the sustainment period should live in perpetuity, rather than be cut off at 3-years, to align with the duration of the SV grant.

THIS IS A NEW VOTE for QCP. Please see the updated CIP and cast your vote accordingly (again if already voted)

Please find ready for vote: CIP-0106: Add QCP Group as a Super Validator (weight 5.0)

• The CIP text as merged in GitHub at the Proposed state
  cf1cd7997b24b1ec1093d515f5a7644d954864d2

No changes will be made to the CIP text after this announcement other than updating the approval date and status.

Sponsors / Endorsers

• Digital Asset– SV Sponsor

• 7Ridge – SV Endorser

Voting Instructions
All other operators, please reply with:

If you believe any change made after this announcement is substantive, please vote not in favor and include your reasoning in the vote response.