Author: sigmund.frax
This post is intended to open a discussion about what others think about the mechanics of the forthcoming governance vote on veFRAX revenue share.
Rationale
FIP-441 [FIP - 441] $FRAX: 1 Token, 1 Mission, 1 Vision set out the rationale for the governance vote with a basic timeline as follows: “the veFRAX revenue share is not fixed permanently and is reviewed by governance on a six-month cadence”.
Discussion Details
This discussion is intended to address:
- Timings of revenue share reporting; subsequent discussion and six monthly voting
- Exact mechanics of the voting
- This discussion is not intended to cover what the actual % should be as we do not know what the actual % currently is (pending receipt of the delayed quarterly report) thus making any discussion hopelessly hypothetical. Although it is accepted that there may be some discussion here around direction of travel for revenue share.
Timings
The author was initially under the impression that the governance vote was to occur on a quarterly basis but on review FIP-441 confirms a six month rhythm. Given that FIP-441 was passed in January 2026 it makes sense to run the six month cadence in H1 (ending June) and H2 (ending December) each year unless anyone has a strong arguments against this.
It is accepted that there has been a delay in producing the quarterly report this month (June) so voting will happen in July but going forward we should aim to get any reporting complete three weeks prior to the start of the half year thus allowing for a two week discussion period and then one week of voting.
Mechanics
In terms of voting mechanics the author is also interested to have an early discussion around what veFRAX holders will actually be voting on every six months (prima facie a simple question).
As we know FIP-441 confirmed that “up to 10% of eligible net protocol revenue is allocated to veFRAX in WFRAX tokens itself which is how the current mechanics work”. The real question is how this will be managed in a governance vote … I don’t think it works to present a range of options (1%, 2%, 3%, 4%, 5% etc etc) as this will dilute the voting.
One solution would be to include “Do Nothing” as maintaining the status quo of x%. With the second option to increase or decrease based in the outcomes of the prior governance discussion. Other opinions on how to make this work are welcomed please.
Action
I would appreciate opinions and feedback on all aspects of this matter to strengthen this informal post and hope we can come to a mutual agreement on this topic.
Thank you for your time.