Check out that goodle doc above linked by Scott. It goes into detail about a bunch of this 
1 Like
Whatās the motivation to be a Main P-Rep in IISS 3.0?
Piconbello Decision: Approve
We believe everything besides bond is beneficial for Icon while we donāt believe bond will deliver what icon foundation try to aim since we donāt have a solution for it and considering all the other positive improvements included in proposal we approve it.
Iād say Governance power is the motivation- ensuring a say in CPF, block production, and Governance votes.
2 Likes
Maybe Im looking at the wrong one - that would explain a lot 
Isnt this the most recently updated proposal?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lPX6veWNTqN1QOz4zeyjc57pvWw3ObVkVkcESbE3428/edit
if there is a more recent/different one that addresses the enquiries above, can you please share a link for it?
1 Like
Thatās the most recent one.
All P-Reps will contribute to the bond starting with the minimum of 10% for teams with less than 1% of total votes allocated to them
10% of all P-Rep inflation will be allocated to the CPF
2 Likes
ah ok, I must have misread that one - I somehow got from it that only the preps with more than 1% delegations will have such bond. Thanks!
1 Like
Hey nblaze - itās a dense document so things can definitely slip through the cracks. Here are some direct answers for you
1.) Adjustments include a 5% minimum bond requirement to be posted by all P-Reps
2.) P-reps can earn and have access to their rewards, but must post the entire bond in order to maximize their rewards. Please see the Appendix section for specific examples showing how a P-Rep āBobā would not be maximizing his rewards if his Bonded Delegation is lower than his Actual Delegation
3.) There is no specific grace period, but the concept of Bonded Delegation makes it so people can still earn and claim rewards even if they donāt have the full bond
4.) The only slashing penalties discussed in IISS 3.0 are related to governance, so it only applies to Main P-Reps. Other penalties, such as low productivity, are not discussed in this proposal
5.) Thank you for the feedback on how to set up the CPF. The actual structure of the CPF is still being worked on
Feel free to DM me on telegram if you need more clarification, thanks!
2 Likes
Thanks Scott! I think that this answers all of my questions
Thank you for the prompt response!
1 Like
Thank you Scott. Very well balanced. Enough incentive for all current P-Reps while laying a strong foundation to attract additional qualified P-Reps in the future.
Approved!!!
1 Like
Approved. All the changes seem fair and reasonable. Good compromise all around from my understanding of it. Always room for more tweaks at the network progresses and new issues arise but all in all itās a step in the right direction
Decision: Approve
Weāre really happy with the new changes, particularly with the revised bond requirement. Thank you for considering the communityās feedback and coming to what we think is the best compromise. 
One question: what kind of timeframe do you expect for contribution proposal votes? Depending on the quantity and nature of the proposals, they may take some time to consider, but we donāt want to hinder progress by taking too long. It would be helpful for everyone involved to know what to expect so they can plan accordingly.
3 Likes
+1 to this question. The voting period is 5 days, but Iād suggest we have a review and Q&A period prior to voting. With the expected growth in proposals, it will be important to come up with an efficient battle rhythm and process for reviewing proposals.
2 Likes
Symmetry SLC Decision: Approve
Thank you for taking all of the P-Rep feedback into account. This iteration of IISS 3.0 seems like it addresses many of the concerns with the current system. The incentives are more clearly aligned toward what the network needs and participants want. It seems like security of the chain is also taken into account more than in the first proposed version and that is the single most important thing when it comes to blockchains.
- Our one request as of right now is, as others above have stated, we would also like for the bond to be able to come from a different wallet, or multiple wallets in order to keep our security as high as possible.
We hope that IISS 3.0 will be a stable base to work from in the future. And, if possible, when changes or tweaks to the system need to be applied we can do it in smaller, more targeted increments in order to keep things consistent and stable. A brand new incentive system every year isnāt exactly what big investors are looking for. However we understand that changes needed to be made, and itās better to be flexible and take care of things now before it becomes more difficult to make these changes.
4 Likes
We can start talking about it on a separate thread at some point. We already have a baseline paper written, and weāll certainly be collecting feedback from the community as we consider pros/cons of different systems.
4 Likes
Official IISS 3.0 Text Proposal
The official IISS 3.0 Text Proposal will be up for vote on UTC 2020-04-23 07:30 AM. The exact schedule is subject to change depending on the Representative Term. Please check the schedule and prepare for voting.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lPX6veWNTqN1QOz4zeyjc57pvWw3ObVkVkcESbE3428/edit?usp=sharing
6 Likes
Team Name: DSNC
Decision: āApproveā
Comments:
Bond Requirement - We think this is a very good idea for each team to show āskin in the gameā and provide their own stake delegated and presenting their aim to keep building their products and services with ICON Project.
Removal of the B1 Reward - this is a big change for ICON Project in a way that the inflation rate will be reduced significantly, but on the other hand, this will heavily reduce the rewards for the sub p-reps which in some cases this rewards will help them build and grow their teams.
Contribution Proposal Fund - We strongly support this idea as this will be a very good way to support the teams who are building their products and donāt have enough resources to do that.
ICON Hyperconnect Decision: Approve
We believe the bond requirement adjustment helps alleviate some concerns although it still remains somewhat of a concern for some teams such as ours and others down the line that may grow fast in a short amount of time.
The progressive ātaxā is fair. We like the idea of CPF being funded by all P-Reps in a progressive system as it aligns with the DPoC ethos.
Our only hope is that we have an active and systematic process in in which we can execute and manage CPF grants to make sure that we can get the best talent to build on ICON.
3 Likes
Decision: Approve
1 Like
Approve. Looking forward to seeing it implemented. Congrats all.
1 Like