Thank you Fernando and the rest of the Balancer Labs team for acting quickly on this.
I personally am for option 1.
To start, I believe there are positive effects of getting rid of the 10% Liquidity Mining Committee allocation. It gives veBAL holders more emissions to direct and it means that if you want to get BAL emissions directed to your pool, there is only one means of doing so–by having your gauge voted for by veBAL lockers. It also increases voting power for veBAL lockers by letting veBAL lockers direct the 10% of emissions that was reserved for the liquidity mining committee.
I also don’t believe that the removal of the strict 10% emissions to veBAL holders will affect the long term incentives of locking veBAL. The value proposition of LP boosts, directing BAL emissions (and the bribes to be collecting from doing so), and the 75% of protocol fees that go directly to veBAL lockers is still strong. I will note that curve does not direct any emissions to vecrv holders and in my mind this was something to help people transition over from a system in which they were used to receiving BAL rewards for their bal/weth BPT.
Additionally, Tom made a proposal to distribute BAL earned from protocol fees directly to veBAL lockers [Proposal] Distribute protocol fees in BAL where appropriate Should this pass, veBAL lockers would still be getting a steady stream of BAL directly from the protocol fees earned.
I was never a fan of the hardcoded L2 emission amounts and I think it levels the playing field for all networks so that veBAL lockers can direct emissions to wherever they desire to, regardless of network. It also makes things easier should Balancer ever launch on another chain.
The team at Balancer Labs is one of the best teams in defi and this is a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things. I encourage community members to speak up and have their voices heard.