I understand the idea of fortifying the chain security of DYDX by using community pool funds, but it doesn’t solve the underlying question.
If the conclusion is that the amount of DYDX staked has leveled out and is not increasing anymore, why are we not asking the question why that is happening first? If this question is not answered beforehand… then there is a measure chosen which will in the end not solve the problem.
I am also glad with the transparency of validators that they are part of the DYDX valset as well as the whitelisted validators from Stride. There is a clear conflict of interest for these validators, which I hope will be reflected in validators voting “Abstain” at the very least.
Looking at the choice of LST-provider it is indeed hard needed to at least include pStake, but I would also like to investigate if QuickSilver can be included as well. In the end DYDX benefits from diversification on that field as well which also reduces systemic risk and exposure to just one party.