I wasn't able to make it this year, but I'll give some brief thoughts. Having clear spending criteria is a good start. However, if something can be attacked, we should look at the best preventive measures possible. I would look into adding a daily cap, something reasonable, that can be adjusted like the APR by the witnesses. Having a cap, ensures there can't be an attack on the DAO where a bad actor tries to drain the DAO. If we had "x" amount as a max possibility a day, something we can all agree on that is reasonable, meaning if it hit that amount, we wouldn't be in bad shape, it seems like a good goal to strive for. This puts at ease any overspending concerns, and ensures the projects that people want funded the most are funded, while adding health competition. Happy to flesh this idea out more, as I know there are nuances to discuss.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
We have all the tools code wise already (at base layer), output from DAO is limited (daily), and as a an additional safeguard there's my Proposal #0 (The Return Proposal), that can limit spending for some of the projects, instead of all.
It takes time (weeks/months) for the larger collective of stakeholders to act on changing circumstances by upvoting/downvoting the return proposal. So seems like the attack vector is there. And sometimes the attack comes from ourselves, haha, as we of course want to fund more and more things.