全文整理翻译自
目录：
- Impossible to implement and what’s the point? 提案无法实现，有什么意义？
- Rush and propose a code rewrite? 是否急于求成且提议重写代码？
- Founder’s concern and clarify the potential risks 创始人的担忧以及对潜在风险的阐述
- Technocracy or lack of effective communication and education? 技术官僚主义还是缺乏有效沟通以及协议科普？
- Short term or long term? Questions about the price of JBX. 短期还是长期？有关 JBX 价格的问题。
twodam — 03/25/2022
Proposal from @MK : https://www.notion.so/juicebox/Stop-Individual-Donation-4d74a422264149f4b085630488664c97
来自 @MK 的提案：
Impossible to implement and what’s the point? 提案无法实现，有什么意义？
filipv — 03/25/2022 I think we need to wait for v2 for the capability to import the JBX token to a new treasury. This proposal might be impossible unless I'm misreading it. Project fees issue tokens at the same exchange rate. What stops people from creating a Juicebox project for this purpose?
我认为我们需要等待 v2 版本，以获得将 JBX 代币导入新金库的能力。这个提案可能无法实现，除非我对内容理解有误。项目缴费会以相同的兑换率发行代币。是什么阻止了人们为此目的创建Juicebox项目？
MK — 03/25/2022 no worry. The price will always be lower than the issue price At this stage, the personal donation function no longer works, we do not need to keep it, the specific details are in the document.
不用担心。价格将永远低于发行价格 在这个阶段，个人捐赠功能不再起作用，我们不需要保留它，具体细节见文档。
zszj（💓，💓） — 03/25/2022 The community strongly calls for the suspension of jbx's donation model. Considering that few individuals have donated for several consecutive cycles, the suspension of individual donations will not have any impact on the development of the project. It just closes a real individual donation channel to enhance the confidence of the secondary market in jbx. At the same time, this is a compromise, which can continue to appease holders' concerns about continued inflation without affecting the development of the project.
Jbx holders have a big opinion on persistent inflation and believe that it is time to make a change to persistent inflation.
社区强烈要求暂停 JBX 的捐赠模式。考虑到连续几个周期都很少有来自个人的捐赠，暂停个人捐赠不会对项目的发展产生任何影响。它只是关闭了一个真正的个人捐赠渠道，来增强二级市场对jbx的信心。同时，这也是一种妥协，既可以继续安抚持有人对持续通胀的担忧，又不影响项目的发展。
Jbx持有人对持续通胀有很大意见，并且认为现在是时候对这种情况做出改变了。
HillStone.eth — 03/25/2022 If someone is going to get JBX by creating a new project, I don't think that's a problem. First of all, the price of tokens is much higher than the price of UNI, and secondly, this also helps to increase the fee income, and also increases the total amount of donations of juicebox. But if this situation occurs in large numbers, we can consider setting the unlock time or release curve of new project tokens or other methods to limit it.
如果有人要通过创建一个新项目来获得 JBX，我认为这不是一个问题。首先，代币的平台铸造价格比在 Uniswap 上的交易价格高得多，其次，这也有助于增加手续费收入，同时也增加了 juicebox 的捐赠总额。但如果这种情况大量出现，我们可以考虑针对项目缴纳手续费时产生的新代币，设置锁定时间、线性释放或其他方法来限制。
提案投票结果：
sesh BOT — 03/26/2022
📊 Stop Individual Donation
End Time
Voting closes in 17 hours
1️⃣ 🟢 - Yes.
████████████████ | 75.61% (31)
2️⃣ 🔴 - No.
█████ | 24.39% (10)
You may select only one option in this poll
⚙️ Settings | Created by filipv
Rush and propose a code rewrite? 是否急于求成且提议重写代码？
Mr. Goldstein — 03/26/2022 Thanks for the proposal @MK, @twodam and team. I am voting a strong no on this one.
I agree with you on the rationale behind this, but disagree with the timing and the way you are doing it. In your proposal you are focused on v1.1 and are ignoring v2, which is under development for over a month. Additionally, you are proposing a code re-write that can set the project back, significantly.
I am all for experimenting with this functionality (blocking individual contributions), and expressed this opinion publicly more than once. However, I believe that it’s in Juicebox’s best interest to hold on such experiment till after v2 and staking is launched.
感谢@MK、@twodam和团队提出的建议。我强烈反对这个提案。
我认同你们背后的理由，但不认同你们的时机和方式。在你的提议中，你只关注 v1.1 版本，而忽略了 v2 版本，后者正在开发中，已经超过一个月了。此外，你还提议重写代码，这可能会使项目明显落后。
我完全支持对这一功能进行试验（阻止个人贡献），并不止一次公开表达过这一观点。但是，我认为，在 v2 版启动后再进行这样的试验是符合 Juicebox 的最佳利益的。
lon — 03/26/2022 Wen v2
什么时候发布 v2
filipv — 03/26/2022 Deploy V2
（译者注：同一周期发起了部署 V2 协议的提案，链接见下方）
twodam — 03/26/2022
This proposal didn't ignore V2, any project are free to migrate between different versions. And V2 frontend are still being developed, plus it will take longer to complete the transition of V2 (V2 frontend/JBX token migrate bridge/veBanny/L2 on chain governance).
Technically, if this proposal pass, we could fork TerminalV1_1, disable individual contributions by "require(msg.sender == terminal)" kind of predicate to implement. So there are no "code re-write" proposed by this proposal.
Migration path: v1 -> v1.1 pause individual contributions -> v2
cc @filipv
这个提案并没有忽略 V2，任何项目都可以在不同的版本之间自由迁移。况且 V2 的前端还在开发中，再加上完全过渡到 V2 的还需要更长的时间（V2 前端/JBX令牌迁移桥/veBanny/L2链上治理）。
从技术上讲，如果这个提案通过，我们可以分叉 TerminalV1_1，通过 "require(msg.sender == terminal) " 这种判断来禁止个人贡献。所以这个提议没有提出要 "重写代码"。 迁移路径：V1 -> v1.1 暂停个人贡献的分叉合约 -> v2
Mr. Goldstein — 03/26/2022
What’s the logic in rushing it, if no one is using it? Don’t get me wrong, I think it should be done. My challenge is the timing of the action.
It seems like we are doing it just to make a point, not to add functionality
如果没有人使用它，急于求成的逻辑是什么？不要误会我的意思，我认为应该这样做。我担心的是这次提案的时机。 看起来我们这样做只是为了表明一个观点，而不是为了增加功能
zszj（💓，💓） — 03/26/2022
Faith is more important than gold
信心比黄金更重要
Pcosen — 03/26/2022
This action means stopping the unlimited addition of jbx tokens.
Even symbolic measures will affect people ' s views.
这一行动意味着停止无限增加 jbx 代币。 即使是象征性的措施也会影响人们的看法。
twodam — 03/26/2022
I believe there are rational written in the proposal already, anyone should vote based on their opinion.
just want to clarify two points here:
- this proposal are technically possible and won’t stop project migrating to V2 going forward.
- proposal are not required to “add functionality”, there are other types of proposals, for example updating configuration in “process update”
if members in DAO want to propose something that are not conflicting other proposals or future plans, it’s happen on exact timing with reasonable opinions/voices/votes instead of “rush”
我相信提案中已经写明了理由，任何人都应该根据自己的意见来投票。 我只想在这里澄清两点：
- 这个建议在技术上是可行的，不会阻止项目向 V2 迁移。
- 提案并不一定要 "增加功能"，还有其他类型的建议，例如在 "流程更新 "中更新配置。
如果 DAO 成员想提出一些与其他提案或未来计划不冲突的建议，那就在准确的时间内提出合理的意见/声音/投票，而不是（如你所说的） "急于求成"。
Founder’s concern and clarify the potential risks 创始人的担忧以及对潜在风险的阐述
jango — Today at 7:28 AM
Strongly against any special logic in any terminal for projectId 1
wait till V2 for a more fruitful discussion of possibilities
强烈反对在任何终端为 projectId 1 制定任何特殊逻辑
（译者注：终端用于处理用户行为，包括支付和赎回等。projectId 1 就是 JuiceboxDAO 这个项目，这个项目募集整个协议的花销，但也作为协议上的项目运行，第一个项目所以 ID 为 1）
等到 V2 的时候再来讨论更多的可能性
在 V2 出来和稳定之前，我们不应该在这里花费 Eng 资源。
no way we should spend eng resources here until V2 is out and stable
I'm much more interested in a proposal of this nature that is implemented using pay delegates in V2, which also include strategies for distributing JBX to contributors who will continue to maintain and build the protocol.
I strongly believe JBX should continue to be issued to new folks contributing, diluting inactive members over time. Otherwise there lacks alignment for the continued building progress.
我对这种性质的提议更感兴趣：它在V2中使用支付代理来实现，其中还包括将 JBX 分配给贡献者的策略，这些贡献者将继续维护和构建协议。
我坚信 JBX 应该继续发放给新的贡献者，随着时间的推移，稀释不活跃的成员。否则，就会缺乏持续建设发展的一致性。
If I were to articulate the biggest token-related problem to solve right now, it’s not donations related. It’s figuring out better ways to get JBX in builders’, projects’, active community members’, and more people’s hands in general.
We’re about to open up a whole new big risk vector with V2. Let’s please keep our focus there in the short term, and meanwhile continue to have tokenomics design discussions together to try and converge on a wholistic gameplan that will serve the many facets of the jbx community. Let’s not rush adding any constraints.
如果让我来阐述目前最大的与代币有关的问题，它与捐赠无关。它是找出更好的方法，让 JBX 给到建设者，项目，活跃的社区成员，以及更多的人的手中。
我们即将在 V2 中打开一个全新的大风险载体。短期内我们需要集中注意力，同时继续一起讨论代币经济学的设计，尝试并汇聚到一个整体的游戏计划上，为jbx社区的许多方面服务。我们不要急于增加任何限制。
If this is the motivation, this is a front-end problem, not a protocol problem.
如果这是提案的动机，那么问题出在前端而不是协议。
Propose to PeelDAO to make the button inactive on the site and direct people to AMM.
可以建议 PeelDAO ，并引导人们去AMM。
（译者注：PeelDAO 是 Juicebox 协议的前端开发团队）
yall. please take a moment to reflect on the risk we'd be assuming in doing anything remotely close to what this proposal is suggesting, at a time when the engineers most familiar with the protocol are hyper focused on V2. 29 upvotes in this temp check, seriously? If anything goes wrong, we could loose our treasury and all of JBX value.
请花点时间反思一下，在最熟悉该协议的工程师们都高度关注V2的时候，我们做任何与该提案建议相近的事情，都会承担很大的风险。在这个临时检查中，有29个赞成票，真的吗？如果出了什么问题，我们可能会失去我们的金库和所有的 JBX 价值。
i will be participating in this vote if it goes to snapshot. the added risk here is existential for the protocol. I don't take this lightly and am a shocked and embarrassed this proposal was submitted without consulting and designing with builders. love you all ❤️
如果这一提案进入到 Snapshot 投票阶段，我会参与这次投票。
（译者注：文中的投票是第一阶段 Discord 内投票，通过的提案才会发到 Snapshot 进行链下签名投票。jango 一般不参与投票，因其与联合创始人 peri 目前各持有 10% 以上的票数）
这里增加的风险对于协议来说，是会危及其存在的。我并不觉得这个问题不足为惧，对这个提案在没有与建设者们协商和设计的情况下就提交，而感到震惊和尴尬。 爱你们❤️
Technocracy or lack of effective communication and education? 技术官僚主义还是缺乏有效沟通以及协议科普？
twodam — Today at 8:09 AM
技术官僚主义（Technocracy）是DAO的黑暗面，无人谈及。它是如何产生的？如何解决？值得我们不断探究。
几乎所有的DAO都存在技术官僚主义（Technocracy），即使一些目前看上去很成功的DAO，其中也有那么一小撮人对提案、决策有着巨大的影响力。如果普通的DAO成员有一个非常不错的提案，只要核心成员或者创始人不喜欢这个提案，就很难通过。从社交/文化角度，很容易理解，社区往往会在投票前，去了解核心成员或者创始人的态度和言论，被他们影响。不管我们赞成与否，这个就是目前每天在DAO发生的事情。
技术官僚主义的产生，其实是社交/文化层面的。我们现在已经有了区块链的去中心化，但是社交/文化的去中心化呢？社交/文化的去中心化，这种vibe的形成，对新启动的大多数DAO都是非常困难的一件事情。
It seems we are still relying on core dev team to develop technical implementation, so if jango representing dev team refuse to take time for dev work of this proposal and choose to veto on this proposal, then I guess there is no point continuing this proposal.
nvm, just trying to help with pushing this proposal initiated by other members a little since I thought there will no much change in code.
看来我们还是要依靠核心开发团队来完成技术实现，所以如果 Jango 代表开发团队拒绝花时间来开发这个提案并选择否决这个提案，那么我想这个提案就没有继续下去的必要了。
没关系，只是想帮助推动这个由其他成员发起的提案，因为我一开始认为，实现这个提案不会需要改动太多代码。
jango — Today at 8:13 AM
@twodam
https://shawn.mirror.xyz/lRsMASEGitKb3nWiLPdDmoqBBp2d3jMLbG_6ta9i5H4
imo this is why we need to issue more JBX as a function of protocol growth, to dilute my membership position of 10% even further and that of folks who have also spent the better part of the past 2 years thinking about this thing and building it. Everyone who joined the DAO joined a mechanism in motion, and a distribution strategy in motion.
我认为这就是为什么我们需要发行更多的 JBX 作为协议增长的功能，以进一步稀释我的 10%的成员持仓，以及那些在过去两年中花了大半时间思考和建立它的人们。每个加入DAO的人都加入了一个持续运行的机制以及分配策略。
jango — Today at 8:20 AM
I work for the DAO on a per-funding cycle basis. If this proposal passes, I'll help execute it, but be mindful that people working for this community will likely choose not to continue doing so if they do not feel trusted and supported. We're on the same team here, we've got to communicate effectively, work together, and focus.
I love big ideas, new ideas, experimental ideas. I don't love being around people who always agree with my point of view, i prefer being around people smarter than me, more creative then me. But we've got to play with ideas over time without rushing, especially big over-arching risk-inducing ones.
我在每个融资周期的基础上为DAO工作。如果这个提案通过了，我会帮助执行，但要注意，为这个社区工作的人如果感觉不到信任和支持，很可能会选择不继续工作。我们在这里是同一个团队，我们必须有效地沟通，一起工作，并集中精力。
（译者注：JuiceboxDAO 每两周为一次治理周期，同时也是预算周期。）
我喜欢大想法，新想法，实验性的想法。我不喜欢和那些总是同意我观点的人在一起，我更喜欢和比我更聪明、更有创造力的人在一起。但是，我们必须随着时间的推移尝试各种想法，而不急于求成，尤其是大型的、有风险的总体性想法。
twodam — Today at 8:22 AM
Yeah, I am happy to work with the team, nothing personal.
it just keeps bothering me since I will need to explain your vote to them. is this code change really “risky” or it’s because you think this proposal are not on the priority so you don’t have time to assess and develop it.
是的，我很高兴与团队合作，这不是针对个人。
只是有件事一直困扰着我，因为我需要向他们解释你这次投票。这个代码修改真的有 "风险 "，还是因为你认为这个提案优先级不够，所以你没有时间评估和开发它？
jango — Today at 8:24 AM
moving 6 thousand ETH to a new contract with new logic that is intertwined with the operations of every other project on the protocol via the fee mechanism, is risky as fuck.
i also don't think it's priority. I also don't think the "motivation" of the proposal is best addressed via a protocol change.
将6000个ETH转移到一个具有新逻辑的新合约上，并通过收费机制与协议上的其他项目的运作交织在一起，这他妈的太冒险了。
我也不认为它是优先事项。我也不认为通过改变协议来解决该提案的“动机”中所提到的问题是最好的选择。
twodam — Today at 8:25 AM
the reason I’m here communicating for this proposal is: they proposers are not good at dev and speaking in english.
want to have one more discussion between the team and the proposal supporters so they will understand more since we are hype focused on dev but not so much on educational?
我在这里为这个提案进行交流的原因是：提案发起者不擅长开发和英语。
我想在团队和提案支持者之间再进行一次讨论，这样他们就会理解更多，因为我们是以开发为重点，在相关教育方面投入相对较少？
filipv — Today at 8:26 AM
I'd also like to point out that it's unlikely this proposal will lead to any significant change in JBX's AMM price. It's not like this stops issuance, this just adds a little bit of friction in the form of having to use a Juicebox project.
The risk reward does not make sense here. Huge amount of dev work and risk, and I don't personally envision this leading to a meaningful shift on secondary markets.
我还想指出的是，这个提议不太可能导致 JBX 的 AMM 价格有任何重大变化。这并不是停止发行，这只是以必须使用 Juicebox 项目的形式增加了一点摩擦。
（译者注：提案只是提议停止个人捐赠，项目依然可以通过缴纳手续费的方式铸造新的 JBX，所以即使这个提案通过，也可以通过创建专用项目的方式来继续铸造新的 JBX）
风险回报在这里是没有意义的。大量的开发工作和风险，我个人认为这不会导致二级市场上有意义的转变。
jango — Today at 8:26 AM
love you for that twodam
filipv — Today at 8:26 AM
I think a discussion is a great idea twodam. Thank you.
twodam — Today at 8:28 AM
got it, you all have made a good point here.
明白了，你们都说得很有道理。
filipv — Today at 8:29 AM
I completely understand where you're coming from, and I know how it feels trying to communicate ideas from many others. You're in a difficult position. Maybe we can start with a blog post which can be translated, and then if community members would like, we can have a discussion facilitated by translators.
我完全理解你的想法，我也知道试图从许多人那里传达想法的感觉。你处于一个困难的位置。也许我们可以从一篇可以翻译的博文开始，然后如果社区成员愿意，我们可以在翻译人员的协助下进行讨论。
jango — Today at 8:51 AM
Worth noting this is how this project has been run since day 1. This discord has been active and open for anyone to join and contribute since like October of 2020 (all ideas were seeds and half baked at best), and the treasury open for anyone to contribute to on equal terms since July of 2021.
There's no core team, just people who have been building here and making shit happen for a while.
值得注意的是，这个项目从第一天起就一直是这样运行的。这个聊天室从2020年10月开始就一直活跃并开放给任何人加入和贡献（所有的想法都是种子，充其量是半成品），从2021年7月开始，项目金库开放给任何人在同等条件下贡献（译者注：捐赠 ETH 获得 JBX）。
没有核心团队，只有那些一直在这里建设并使事情发生的人。
2>为什么这种模式可以消除技术官僚主义？
因为从一开始，就没有所谓的核心团队，更不是由一小撮人决定了DAO的使命和价值观，而且社区具备了技术能力，可以自行解决问题。这才是真正的去中心化社交/文化。一旦有技术官僚主义的苗头出现，社区有能力压制它。
不可否认，即使这样的DAO还是存在一些leader，存在技术官僚主义的可能性。但是在这种去中心化社交/文化中，leader很容易变成teacher，而且他们会互相论辩，而不是形成小团体。
the devs who have more membership leverage have been the ones consistently here working for almost two years now, alongside some other non-tech artist and energy leaders who showed up like @Sage and @Mieos. people started trusting them and betting on them and the mechanism at play, and its just awesome to see a wide membership community these days. I wish it were wider, hence my belief in the need to continue issuing and distributing more JBX.
the alternative would have been to always issue 1,000,000 JBX per ETH contributed forever, and never recognize any additional membership weight for folks who are building and participating earlier.
拥有更多成员影响力的开发者已经在这里持续工作了近两年，还有其他一些非技术性的艺术家和能量领袖出现，比如 @Sage 和 @Mieos。人们开始信任他们，并把赌注押在他们身上，以及发挥作用的机制上，这些天看到一个广泛的成员社区真是太棒了。我希望它更广泛，因此我相信需要继续发行和分发更多的JBX。
另一个选择是，每贡献一个ETH，就发行100万JBX，而对于那些正在建设和参与的人，不再给予任何额外的会员权重。
（译者注：目前 JuiceboxDAO 项目参数会激励早期参与，长期持有以及建设协议的成员，而不是一成不变的铸造价格）
Short term or long term? Questions about the price of JBX. 短期还是长期？有关 JBX 价格的问题。
zszj（💓，💓） — Today at 10:19 AM
However, the price performance of the secondary market has been getting lower and lower. Inflation is too high, and the prices caused by continuous issuance are sluggish. Have you considered JBX holders? They are not paid. The jbx held has also been hitting a new low.
然而，二级市场的价格表现却越来越低。通货膨胀太高，连续发行造成的价格低迷。你考虑过JBX持有人吗？他们是没有工资的。持有的jbx也一直在创下新低。
jango — Today at 10:21 AM
this was not the stated motivation of this proposal.
这并不是该提案的既定动机。
zszj（💓，💓） — Today at 10:21 AM
You can vote. Dao must be executed, even if the vote can't vote for you for the time being. But this is a way for the community to express its attitude. The Chinese community has a strong opposition to your mechanism of sustained inflation, that's it.
你可以投票。DAO 必须执行，即使目前投票不能如你所愿。但这是社区表达自己态度的一种方式。中文社区强烈反对你的持续通货膨胀机制，就是这样。
jango — Today at 10:22 AM
I do think of JBX holders on a long-term basis, not as much on a short term price action basis which we know can be deceiving. JBX is a membership instrument, not a speculative instrument. the DAO does not currently relate to JBX's secondary market dynamic, which I understand has fairly low liquidity anyways. The priority right now is not token price, it should be token spread and network growth.
我确实有从长期的角度来考虑 JBX 的持有者，而不是从短期的价格行为来考虑，我们知道短期的价格行为是具有欺骗性的。JBX是一种成员制工具，而不是一种投机工具。DAO 目前与 JBX 的二级市场动态无关，据我所知，无论如何，其流动性都相当低。现在的首要任务不是代币价格，应该是代币传播和网络增长。
jango — Today at 10:23 AM
You can vote. Dao must be executed, even if the vote can't vote for you for the time being. But this is a way for the community to express its attitude. The Chinese community has a strong opposition to your mechanism of sustained inflation, that's it.
i respect this.
我尊重这一点。
jango — Today at 10:24 AM
there has been relatively no inflation for a while now. There's actually be net deflation for the past month.
also needs noting: inflation only occurs when ETH is added to the treasury. JBX is backed by the ETH in the treasury and the work being funded by the ETH from payout distributions.
it is not a speculative token, it is a membership and treasury instrument.
现在已经有一段时间没有通货膨胀了。在过去的一个月里，实际上是净通货紧缩。
还需要注意的是：通货膨胀只发生在ETH被添加到国库的时候。JBX是由国库中的ETH支持的，而工作的资金来自于支付分配的ETH。
它不是一个投机性的代币，它是一个成员和财政工具。
https://dune.xyz/twodam/Juicebox-Projects?project_handle=juicebox （译者注：JuiceboxDAO 项目数据面板）
it is impossible to inflate JBX without adding ETH to the treasury, which gives each JBX issued in previous funding cycles more proportional ETH backing.
如果不向国库添加 ETH，就不可能使 JBX 膨胀，这使以前的融资周期中发行的每个 JBX 都有更多比例的 ETH 支持。
（译者注：JBX 铸造都是需要往金库增加 ETH 的，根据目前的项目配置，每个周期后铸造的比例都会降低 10%，也就是铸造的价格相对 ETH 是上涨 10%）
zszj（💓，💓） — Today at 10:37 AM
Jbx itself is a token. Naturally, it has investment attributes. Holders must care about the price, which you can't ignore unilaterally. At the same time, the price increase of tokens themselves is the best spread ,which can bring more network growth.
I can understand that your inflation mechanism is not just inflation. It is supported by eth, but many people can't understand it. They will pay special attention to your additional issuance mechanism, which seriously limits the rising ceiling of tokens. It leads to a lack of willingness to buy. This is not conducive to the secondary market. Although your logic is long-term, how long will it take to be called long-term, how long-term, how long-term investor, and what are you are the speculator you mentioned? Can you give a definition?
Jbx本身就是一种代币。自然，它具有投资属性。持有者必须关心价格，这是你不能单方面忽视的。同时，代币本身的价格上涨是最好的传播（译者注：应该是想说带来热度），这可以带来更多的网络增长。
我可以理解，你的通货膨胀机制不仅仅是通货膨胀。它是有 ETH 支撑的，但很多人不能理解它。他们会特别注意你的额外发行机制，这严重限制了代币的上升上限。这导致了购买意愿的缺乏。这不利于二级市场的发展。虽然你的逻辑是长期的，但要多长时间才能被称为长期的，如何长期的，如何长期的投资者，你是你提到的投机者是什么？你能给个定义吗？
jango — Today at 10:44 AM
a little fun fact.
Currently the JBX price on coinmarket cap is $0.007849 per JBX. There is 2,474,512,567 JBX outstanding.
That's a market cap of $18,776,601.35.
There is $19,242,493 currently in the treasury...
... and the funds spent from the treasury thus far are being used to build massively important protocol infrastructure to further support projects building ontop which will pull in more cashflow. The protocol is already pulling in a lot of cashflow. Many contributors here spend most of their time helping projects get off the ground and build their own networks.
一个小的有趣的事实。 目前，JBX在 CoinMarketCap 的上限价格是每 JBX 0.007849 美元。目前 JBX 流通量为 2,474,512,567。
也就是说，市值为 18,776,601.35 美元。
而目前金库里有 19,242,493 美元......
......到目前为止，从国库中支出的资金被用来建立大规模的重要协议基础设施，以进一步支持在上面建立的项目，这将拉动更多的现金流。该协议已经吸引了大量的现金流。这里的许多贡献者将他们的大部分时间用于帮助项目落地和建立他们自己的网络。
zszj（💓，💓） — Today at 10:45 AM
Generally speaking, I think you have ignored the secondary market price of tokens for a long time. You don't think it's important. Unilaterally ignore the voice of investors in the secondary market. Although you have always thought that your token model is right for a long time, don't forget that there is no short-term, where does it come from? The short term is also very important.
一般来说，我认为你长期以来一直忽视了代币的二级市场价格。你认为这并不重要。单方面忽视了二级市场上投资者的声音。虽然你一直认为你的代币模式在很长一段时间内是正确的，但不要忘了，没有短期，它从哪里来？短期也是非常重要的。
jango — Today at 10:45 AM
the problem here isn't the price, it's education. We need to all be working together to help projects build on the protocol and feel welcome here. Part of this is making sure projects get JBX as they pay fees and join the network.
这里的问题不是价格问题，而是教育问题。我们需要一起努力，帮助项目建立在协议上，并感到被欢迎。而这其中的一部分就是要确保项目在支付费用和加入网络时得到 JBX。
jango — Today at 10:46 AM
id rather build a useful protocol and help people launch useful projects than build a JBX pump mechanic.
JBX value will increase as people realize the potential here.
我宁愿建立一个有用的协议并帮助人们启动有用的项目，而不是建立一个 JBX 拉盘（译者注：pump 这样翻译对吗？）的机制。 JBX的价值会随着人们认识到这里的潜力而增加。
jango — Today at 10:49 AM
ive ignored it because I prefer to focus my energy everyday helping the brilliant projects that ask for help and advice on how they can best use Juicebox to run successful community treasuries, or building and documenting the protocol for other to develop on.
these initiatives literally bring in cash flow
but, more importantly, they create an ecosystem of project developers who can extend the network in beautiful new ways.
but, let's play this exercise out, just for fun: how would we design a mechanism specifically to increase the JBX token price on secondaries?
... the best way I can think of is to continue doing what we're doing... building the protocol and helping projects. And in V2, once we've move governance more on-chain, potentially routing fees to an AMM instead of the treasury if the issuance rate is worse than a uni pool's rate, or something
but we still will want to issue JBX as the network grows to create certain incentives, like making our contributors valuable DAO members, creating relationships with other DAO's via token swaps, etc.
我没有理会它是因为我更愿意每天集中精力帮助那些寻求帮助和建议的杰出项目，让他们能够最好地使用 Juicebox 来成功地运行社区财政，或者建立和记录协议，供其他人开发。
这些举措带来了实际的现金流。
但更重要的是，他们创造了一个由项目开发者组成的生态系统，他们可以以美丽的新方式扩展网络。
但是，让我们来做这个练习，只是为了好玩：我们如何设计一个机制，专门提高JBX代币在二级市场的价格？
......我能想到的最好方法是继续做我们正在做的事情......建立协议和帮助项目。在V2中，一旦我们开始更多地进行链上治理，在铸造价格比 Uniswap 高的时候可能会把费用转到 AMM 而不是金库，或者其他方面
但随着网络的发展，我们仍然希望发行JBX以创造某些激励，比如让我们的贡献者成为有价值的DAO成员，通过代币交换与其他DAO建立关系，等等。
loveurlifeudare — Today at 11:43 AM
I believe in you and admire your economic model, which is why I am also a member of the juicebox community and JBX holders. However, I cannot ignore the facts I see. No more huge Dao has appeared again on the platform recently since Constitution DAO and AssangeDAO, and JBX prices remain low. In this case, I can't be persuaded by "valuable or will be valuable". However, seeing the above messages, I still choose to believe in Juicebox and you. BUT, I think we should respect and incorporate each other's ideas, rather than completely deny them. If the founders who hold most of the tokens vote, what is the significance of Web3 and decentralization? (Especially no founders vote before). Of course you can vote and I cannot stop you because I am nobody, please seriously think about the ideas put forward by all members of the community. Since voting yes is more than no, it must be reasonable. I will respect you and your idea, my suggestion is that you need to consider it seriously. Don't miss the big future.
我相信你，并钦佩你的经济模式，这就是为什么我也是juicebox社区的成员和JBX持有人。然而，我不能忽视我看到的事实。自从宪法DAO和AssangeDAO之后，最近平台上没有再出现巨大的Dao，而JBX的价格仍然很低。在这种情况下，我不能被 "有价值的终将有价值 "所说服。然而，看到上述信息，我仍然选择相信Juicebox和你。但是，我认为我们应该尊重和吸收对方的想法，而不是完全否定他们。如果持有大部分代币的创始人投票，那么Web3和去中心化的意义何在？(尤其是之前没有创始人投票）。当然你可以投票，我不能阻止你，因为我谁也不是，请认真思考社区所有成员提出的想法。既然投赞成票比反对票多，就一定要合理。我会尊重你和你的想法，我的建议是，你需要认真考虑。不要错过大好的未来。
Mr. Goldstein — Today at 11:53 AM
I respect this view and support the initiative overall. But tell me, what is the point proposing something that can only be implemented through a fork, when a solution that supports it is being built?
Also, @zszj（💓，💓） you made a point that the issue is inflation and the way to solve this is eliminating user contributions, however no user contributions were made in the last 2 cycles. Why do you think this is a real problem?
我尊重这个观点，总体上支持这个倡议。但是请告诉我，当支持它的解决方案正在建立时，提出只能通过分叉来实现的东西有什么意义呢？
另外，@zszj（💓，💓 ）说 你提出了一个观点，即问题在于通货膨胀，解决这个问题的方法是消除用户的贡献，但是在过去的两个周期中没有用户的贡献。为什么你认为这是一个真正的问题？
loveurlifeudare — Today at 12:20 PM
I'm just making some comments and express my personal opinion. Everybody’s voice should be heard in the community. If you want to ask the point, what's the point of ignoring or even negating other people's ideas? Even I can ask a question what’s the point of point. Love and peace.
我只是做一些评论，表达我的个人观点。在社区里，每个人的声音都应该被听到。如果要问重点，无视甚至否定别人的想法有什么意义？连我都能问出一个问题，“有什么意义”这个问题有什么意义？爱与和平。
Mr. Goldstein — Today at 12:23 PM
Didn’t mean to show disrespect. As I said before I am supportive of the initiative, but against the timing.
I think the timing of the proposal ignores the state of the DAO and the development efforts that are ongoing
并非有意表现出不尊重。正如我之前所说，我支持这个倡议，但反对这个时机。
我认为这个提议的时机忽略了DAO的状态和正在进行的开发工作
zszj（💓，💓） — Today at 12:24 PM
Because this is an expectation. Although there has been no inflation in the past two cycles, the donation function has always existed, which means that inflation occurs at any time, and jbx, which brings more mobility, will be arbitrage at a high level. This is definitely a bad thing for the holder in the short term. In addition, there have been no new large projects crowdfunding on the platform in the past two cycles, which will bring negative revenue to the treasury, which will lead to fewer and less treasury amounts. Whether there will be large projects crowdfunding on the platform in the future is unknown. The platform crowdfunding of the previous big projects is crowdfunding. I think luck is a big component. At the same time, you reduced the handling fee to 2.5%, which will lead to lower treasury revenue. Although you want to attract the project party for this, the reason why the project party comes to the platform is that the popularity of the platform is more important, which can bring a larger amount of eth donations than because of your low handling fee. So if according to your model, the growth of the vault is not only very slow, but it is not even ruled out that it will fall
因为这是一种预期。虽然过去两个周期没有通货膨胀，但捐赠功能一直存在，这意味着通货膨胀随时发生，而带来更多流动性的jbx，将在高位套利。这在短期内对持有人来说绝对是一件坏事。此外，在过去两个周期内，平台上没有新的大型项目众筹，这将给国库带来负收入，这将导致国库金额越来越少。未来是否会有大型项目在平台上众筹还不得而知。之前大项目的平台众筹就是众筹。我认为运气是一个很大的组成部分。同时，你把手续费降到2.5%，这将导致金库收入减少。虽然你想为此吸引项目方，但其实比起手续费率低，平台知名度更重要，能带来更大的 ETH 捐款。所以如果按照你的模式，金库的增长不仅非常缓慢，甚至不排除会下降的可能
Mr. Goldstein — Today at 12:27 PM
Everything you said is valid. But why do this now vs. Wait until after v2, when everything that drives value here is the tech?
你说的一切都很有道理。但是，为什么现在要这样做，而不是等到v2之后？况且目前这里驱动价值的一切都是技术？
loveurlifeudare — Today at 12:30 PM
Wish the right timing would not be too long. Thanks.👍
希望不久后就能看见这个正确的“时间点”。谢谢。👍
zszj（💓，💓） — Today at 12:30 PM
I don't have to do it in this cycle. It also does not support bifurcation to achieve this goal. Because I don't understand the technical changes that need to be made to achieve this goal. I just want to express this. The core team attaches importance to the secondary market and inflation. If necessary, it pays some attention to jbx holders, whether in the long term, the primary market or the secondary market. In essence, everyone's interests in holding jbx should be the same, instead of always saying that those in the secondary market are speculators. .
我不需要在这个周期内做。也不支持分叉来实现这个目标。因为（此前）我不明白要实现这个目标需要做哪些技术上的改变。我只想表达这一点 —— 核心团队要重视二级市场和通货膨胀。如果有必要，它对jbx持有人给予一定的关注，无论是长期的、一级市场的还是二级市场的。实质上，每个人持有jbx的利益都应该是一样的，而不是总是说二级市场的人是投机者。
Mr. Goldstein — Today at 12:32 PM
Everything you said is 100% valid. We are aligned. Let’s implement v2, which is being proposed now, and then re-visit this using v2 functionality
你说的一切都100%有效。我们是一致的。让我们实现现在提出的 v2 协议，然后用 v2 协议的功能重新审视这个问题。
全文完。
所有讨论来自 JuiceboxDAO 的 Discord 群组，欢迎通过以下链接加入！