I am on board with bytemaster's suggestion for future DAC's.
I would even go so far as to say we could even increase max delegate pay in BTSX without breaking the social contract, so long as the total delegate pay never exceeds total fees / burn.
But I am worried about arhag's objection [1] that delegates with support from a substantial minority of the network may be able to game the system and introduce a level of inflation that is neither justified by their activities nor approved by a majority.
How about having each balance vote for a desired overall inflation cap as well as a slate of delegates? Then we can determine a "consensus inflation cap" as the point where 50% [2] of outstanding shares have approved that cap or some higher cap. We can implement this by giving only e.g. 256 choices for the desired inflation cap, and keeping track of the number of votes for each choice. Then you sum the table from highest inflation cap down, stopping when you've accumulated more than 50% of the total share supply -- the inflation cap at which that happens is the maximum desired inflation the shareholders are willing to tolerate.
If all delegates' requested funding can be provided within the inflation cap, then everything is OK. Otherwise, we adjust the delegates' pay rates downward proportionally [3] until the effective inflation level is equal to the consensus level. And prominently display some "WE ARE IN A BUDGET CRISIS" banner on everyone's client until the situation is resolved, which happens when:
- Some or all delegates reduce their requested funding levels so the inflation cap is no longer exceeded ("management cuts costs to avoid shareholders' wrath")
- Shareholders agree to more dilution by adjusting their inflation cap upwards ("shareholders approve management's request for greater funding")
- Shareholders vote out delegates with high funding requirements in favor of delegates with lower expenses ("shareholders fire management for blowing the budget")
The banner would fight voter apathy by serving as a call to action to all delegates and shareholders that now is a time to get involved in the debate and examine your votes, regardless of which of the above policy choices you support.
[1]
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=9452.msg122842#msg122842[2] Instead of 50%, you could make this a parameter MAX_INFLATION_QUORUM and require e.g. 55%, 60% or 66.7% quorum to set the inflation cap.
[3] Other downward adjustment schemes are possible, where e.g. the pay of the delegates with the most recent raises is cut first, or there is some explicit prioritization of delegates. These likely would be additional implementation complexity for unclear benefits.