A few remarks as a Safe Guardian, some of them opinionated:
Or perhaps we should consider a profit-sharing model for karpatkey, based on the profitability of the treasure?
This is a pretty standard arrangement in the world of fund management and is worth considering.
no loss of value has occurred due to Karpatkey’s action.
I think it’s important to keep this in mind. Karpatkey can’t magically keep the token afloat and shouldn’t be expected to. Rather than dismissing actors it’s more productive to look at token fundamentals: SAFE has a high FDV and a pretty aggressive inflation due to its unlock schedule.
The right way to deal with these fundamental issues is to model out its tokenomics and balance out SAFE inflation due to new issuance with appropriate sinks, such as the previously mentioned fee engine. There seems to be progress here based on the Token Utility Sprint 1.
A tokenomic dashboard evaluating the net flow of issuance vs. sinks would be exceptionally helpful here, as well as economic models of future expected sinks.
Also just a note - the SAFE DAO hasn’t loss anything since it still holds the tokens one can’t lose something until they convert it to another token. 1 SAFE = 1 SAFE.
This is disingeneous in economic terms. The SafeDAO has lost purchasing power with its native crypto-asset, the SAFE token, in the previous three months.