Do you agree that the dev bounty amount should not not be in question (or is probably too low)?
I agree with you that a new incentive structure would be preferable and it should be created if we can reach a consensus.
My issue is not with the amount. It is that the bounty is built into the protocol level. I believe (and I believe others will believe) that developer funds and project bounties should happen a level above the protocol, on a social layer - no profit/compensation mechanisms should ever be baked into the protocol itself.
As well I am concerned about the nature of this fund. Is this a stash specifically for the head dev that he claims as his own? Or is it a war chest that has been pledged to incentivize development now and in the future?
Let me be clear that I have a favorable opinion of Boolberry, respect their technical development of the Cryptonote protocol and include them in the short list of not just valid Cryptonote projects - but valid "alt" coins. I just wish some things were different, and I think it would benefit their long term adoption.
100% agreed. The social layer is the only layer suited for this kind of things. This is probably one of the things that kept BBR from flying...