The attack that you are describing as well as linked is not possible because:
- not enough freely circulating supply for an economic attack
- an attack would always cost more than the value of the treasury
- the community (what gives the token value) can fork away
- all token based attacks can be prevented with token swaps, locking $CODE for access, charging services in $CODE or a DIP empowering the treasury to monitor and sell $CODE if the theoretical value of the circulating supply is bigger that 2/3 of the treasury’s value. (problem solved) God knows what solution can emerge if we ask or if it would be easy to propose them for wide consideration.
The chances of a successful economic attack are ~0 
. Would be a cool way to 5x budgets tho.
- The social contract which we all signed has in the title “Decentralized” and “Autonomous”.
- Proposals that centralize power and institutionalize gatekeepers are in breach of it.
- There’s no instance where centralizing power as part of decentralization has ever worked out.
It’s my responsibility to that social contract, and to myself to say something. Personally, I cannot think of a lower effort, bottom shelf governance solution than this. It doesn’t even pass the very low bar of rugpull prevention. Not only that, but restricts participation. Progressive decentralization, if that’s what we’re doing, implies progress towards decentralization. I fail to see how this moves us in that direction.
It is everyone’s fault. Mine as well. But now a bit less so. 