9

Proposal 6, a proposal that got passed offering a change in incentives distributions in order to include Regen pools, had a data entry error that differed from the proposal text. This error went uncaught in the governance approval process, and was approved and included on chain. This highlights the need for more tooling and standards being set here for ensuring that any manual adjustments to OSMO pool incentives get much more auditability.

Proposal 6 was passed in the last epoch at the time of this proposal's writing. This proposal offers a governance proposal to align the ratios with what was proposed in proposal 6, except with the following modification:

The Community pool allocation from LP incentives is lowered from 5% to 1%, with the remaining 4% being distributed evenly across all pools with lower than expected allocations per the text of prop 6. This is namely every incentivized pool, except for the OSMO/ION, ATOM/REGEN, and OSMO/REGEN. This is done as a means of accounting for the lower than expected rewards in the interrim. Please note that the baseline 5% of community pool rewards from minting is unchanged

Alternatively, the community could equally vote on a new incentives distribution, such as is proposed in proposal 8, or a new proposal based on current TVL similar to proposal 2.

One important thing to remark is that it is plausible that this proposal and proposal 8 both enter their voting period during the same epoch. If this is the case, only one should be voted yes. (As whichever one gets passed second will override the other within the same epoch) In the following github gist, we post the intended distribution of the rewards for prop 6 per our understanding, the modification to the distribution with the community pool allocation change, and list the intended gauge allocation points. Furthermore, there are brief instructions on how to check the proposal: [Hidden link]