Given this is going to snapshot, I wanted to give my take as well.
tldr: for rq
I’m torn between the timing of RQ and whether it should happen now or in the future once V2 has a chance to prove itself.
I fully agree that the past year of trading below backing has been a poor look on the DAO and outright should have been protected, it is unfair for any holder to get less than the share of the treasury they are owed. The best time to do this would have been back in April when RAMOS was first proposed, which would have required less treasury funds and provide lasting backing protection into the future FIP#39: Implement RAMOS - #5 by Lux.
I think V2 could have a chance to entice more actors into playing the game and push users to floor but like I had mentioned in the Locking pt2 discussion I’m not sure it drives additional value to the floor token itself - which is my primary concern as a floor token holder. There is always the ability to wait and see.
I think one of the strongest arguments Lux has made is that a RQ before V2 is the best way to set up V2 for success. If a RQ were to not happen, I believe status quo would simply continue whereby every gauge vote results in a significant share being for FLOOR buybacks - this clearly nullifies a core benefit of v2 which is to have it be enticing enough of an opportunity for NFT collections / fans to come allocate 10e a week to sweeps.
The DAO would simply be hindering it’s ability to bring in a new community of engaged and active participants due to past promises unkept. Why do this? It is easy to see that the most fair and beneficial thing to do would be to RQ and move forward with V2. Further, if the DAO wishes to remove backing as a concept to untie MC&TV entirely it should do so after letting people exit or stick with it and protect it - this is real people’s money…
Oh also: Redeemed FLOOR should be burnt of course XD