Alec Shaw, in his last participation, stated something very important.
He said “There is plenty of Spa to go around”.
By doing so, a person as insider to the project as he is, he gives us the indication that there are options, and those options obviously do not affect the project.
Otherwise, he would not have mentioned it.
As we have already demonstrated in the second “Partial and Mandatory Staking” survey, we miners have no objection to staking part of our funds.
Looking at the Supply Program… of the Sperax Foundation, we see that the possibility of a remuneration to “Community Contributors” and other roles is contemplated.
The total for all the roles mentioned is 20% of the Spa supply.
Therefore, this is the real role of the miners: Community Contributors.
And our contribution has been “to grow the Sperax USD (USD) and the Sperax ecosystem”.
Obviously this Community Contribution can be measured by the Xp of each user.
The users of this forum I don’t think we have enough information, financial knowledge and the plans and perspectives that the Sperax Team has, to make a wise decision.
Both groups find us pretending an extreme conversion, without accurate information.
Only the Sperax Foundation knows all the numbers, the different options, their perspectives and objectives in the medium and long term.
Therefore, the most convenient thing would be that the Sperax Team offers us some options to evaluate or vote, regarding our retribution as Community Contributors.
This option that the Sperax Foundation has, would not be subject to a DAO vote; I believe I understand?
However, in the event that it is subject to a DAO vote, it is the Sperax Foundation that will present the DAO with “various compensation structures”.
For that reason, I think that a joint work of the Sperax Foundation and the Taxpayers would be desirable, so that we can make a good decision.