Excited to see Tokenomics conversation taking the foreground - the timing feels perfect to upgrade the CELO tokenomics in line with Vision 2030 and the current best practices!
On cutting down Validators
Agreed that any changes to Validator count, rewards, or other logic should come from a holistic, data-driven decision framework, instead of an arbitrary cut.
To stay on course to grow the Celo ecosystem and get back into the top 5 of EVM chains, I believe we should map and evaluate all forms of token issuance/treasury spend and token sinks/revenue sources to determine which of these should be scaled down, reduced, or cut completely.
In general, it does feel like we’re overspending on Validators purely based on their current function; however, that doesn’t mean reducing the number of validators is the only (and right) solution.
We’ve started a parallel thread Strengthen Tokenomics: Accelerate stCELO, to explore ways to increase the value of staked Celo for the ecosystem, both through leveraging stCELO as a productive asset and increasing the function and impact validators have on the Celo ecosystem.
Will continue to follow and give input on this thread, and happy to support any efforts to rework CELO tokenomics!