Option A: If the price falls, we dont pay out the contracts. In this case weve made a contract and burned the bridge with a contractor doing ongoing work. This makes our network unusable long term.
Option B: The proposal system could create unpredictable inflation based on the promises the network is making for USD based contracts.
Option C: We allocate in Dash to avoid all of these issues and dont support USD based contracts at all.
Option D: We give the foundation a budget to take Dash and convert it to fiat, then it keeps the fiat in a bank account. The contractors would contract with our foundation directly and this bank account would serve as a volatility buffer.
Option E: We allocate only X% of the budgets according to the historical volatility of the currency. This can be calculated by taking two standard deviations from the average price history for a long period of time, then figuring out a high and low price threshold. However, this will still result in contractors getting burned once in a while.
I like Option C.
Because I think the current problems are for contractors who win contracts that involve settlement to a 3rd party in a particular FIAT (which happens to be all USD right now), e.g. acting as an agent between the network and the upstream supplier or a contractor and a subcontractor.
Dash's contract is between the network and the contractor (regardless of their upstream chain for goods or services) and it would be a minefield to start adding other currencies into the core agreement between the network and the contractor (whether they are a supplier or an agent).
If suppliers are acting as agents for a 3rd party supplier then they really need to carry the fluctuation risk the same as happens in the real world. For example if I award a contract to manufacture my socks to a company in Guangdong in RMB and they get the cotton from India and INR drops against RMB, that's the supplier's problem, they can't come back and say 'exchange rates changed with one of my suppliers so i want more money than we agreed'. Likewise if I hire a patent lawyer in London who takes Dash and he needs to pay for searches in USD and GBP drops against USD, that's his risk and it should be priced in it's just part of the risk of being a supplier and that's why we have a market in DGBB, people can compete and price all this stuff in (not yet obviously).
I get that this means that it's going to be harder to honor USD contracts with the current setup, but i think we should find another way, adding other currencies in the 1st tier contract between the network and the supplier is complexity as I see it. Just thoughts though.