Hello all, speaking as the crafter of this proposal perhaps I can fill in some details of what we were aiming to do and what’s changed since the proposal went out.
First let’s address the technicality of this line:
@eboado correctly identifies this as the “Reserve Factor” parameter which at the time of writing the proposal we were planning to use the reserve factor as revenue to Spark. You can see evidence of this in the DaiInterestRateStrategy that we deployed which contains borrowSpread to add a markup to the borrow side beyond the rate being paid out to suppliers. The problem we ran into is that only fixed % reserve factors are supported by the code. You can see this here and please correct me if there is a workaround we missed.
One alternative we investigated at the time was to have the reserve factor at 100% and burn the excess liabilities after the fact. You can see evidence for these changes here:
Closed PR to burn the excess liabilities (Mar 29-May 9): Add DaiCollector by hexonaut · Pull Request #2 · marsfoundation/sparklend · GitHub
Mainnet Spell setting RF to 0% after it had originally been configured to 100%: https://github.com/makerdao/spells-mainnet/blob/master/archive/2023-04-28-DssSpell/DssSpell.sol#L127
In the end it was realized it was simpler to forward all revenue to Maker and do quarterly off-chain settlement. Any revenue paid to Spark will also send 10% of that amount to AaveDAO as agreed. This is the intention of the original agreement, and it’s still very much intact.
As a representative of Phoenix Labs, we have no direct connection to MakerDAO. We have observed the rules voted in by the DAO called “Endgame” which allows for SubDAOs to receive credit lines from Maker at the “Base Rate” provided the rules are followed. As part of these rules Spark SubDAO is obligated to pay the full Base Rate to MakerDAO, and there is no authority to give revenue out that is not owned by the SubDAO.
The feeling is mutual, and I hope we can continue.