Lowering Deposit Requirements on Polkadot and Kusama Asset Hub

text/000x-assethub.md

@@ -0,0 +1,92 @@
+# RFC-0000: Lowering NFT Deposits on Polkadot and Kusama Asset Hubs
+
+|                 |                                                                                                    |
+| --------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| **Start Date**  | 2 November 2023                                                                                    |
+| **Description** | A proposal to reduce the minimum deposit required for collection creation on the Polkadot and Kusama Asset Hub, making it more accessible and affordable for artists. |
+| **Authors**     | [Aurora Poppyseed](https://github.com/poppyseedDev), [Just_Luuuu](https://github.com/justLuuuu), [VikiiVal](https://github.com/vikiival)  |
+
+## Summary
+
+This RFC proposes a change to the current deposit requirements on the Polkadot and Kusama Asset Hub for creating NFT collections. The objective is to lower the barrier to entry for artists, fostering a more inclusive and vibrant ecosystem, while maintaining network integrity and preventing spam.
+
+## Motivation
+
+The current deposit of 10 DOT for collection creation on the Polkadot Asset Hub presents a significant financial barrier for many artists. By lowering the deposit requirements, we aim to encourage more artists to participate in the Polkadot NFT ecosystem, thereby enriching the diversity and vibrancy of the community and its offerings.
+
+## Stakeholders
+
+- **Artists**: Primary beneficiaries of the proposed change, particularly those who found the current deposit requirements prohibitive.
+- **KodaDot**: As the facilitator of artists' relations, KodaDot has a vested interest in making the platform more accessible.
+- **Polkadot Community**: Stands to benefit from an influx of artists, creators and diverse NFT collections, enhancing the overall ecosystem.
+
+Previous discussions have been held within the KodaDot community, as well as with artists expressing their concerns about the deposit amounts. Referencing to [Polkadot Forum conversation](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/polkadot-assethub-high-nft-collection-deposit/4262).
+
+## Explanation
+This RFC suggests modifying the smart contract governing collection creation on the Polkadot Asset Hub to require a lower deposit. The exact amount of the reduced deposit is yet to be determined and should be discussed and agreed upon by the stakeholders. The implementation of this change requires careful consideration of the network's integrity and the prevention of spam, possibly through alternative means such as rate limiting or account verification.
+
+**Prices and Proposed Prices on Polkadot Asset Hub:**
+_Scroll right_
+```
+| **Name**                  | **Current price implementation** | **Price if DOT = 5$**  | **Price if DOT goes to 50$**  | **Proposed Price in DOT** | **Proposed Price if DOT = 5$**   | **Proposed Price if DOT goes to 50$**|
+|---------------------------|----------------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------------|---------------------------|----------------------------------|--------------------------------------|
+| collectionDeposit         | 10 DOT                           | 50 $                   | 500 $                         | 0.1 DOT                   | 0.5 $                            | 5$                                   |
+| itemDeposit               | 0.01 DOT                         | 0.05 $                 | 0.5 $                         | 0.001 DOT                 | 0.005 $                          | 0.05$                                |
+| metadataDepositBase       | 0.20129 DOT                      | 1.00645 $              | 10.0645 $                     | 0.0020129 DOT             | 0.0100645 $                      | 0.100645$                            |
+| attributeDepositBase      | 0.2 DOT                          | 1 $                    | 10 $                          | 0.002 DOT                 | 0.01 $                           | 0.1$                                 |
+```
+
+**Prices and Proposed Prices on Kusama Asset Hub:**
+_Scroll right_
+```
+| **Name**                  | **Current price implementation** | **Price if KSM = 23$** | **Price if KSM goes to 500$** | **Proposed Price in KSM** | **Proposed Price if KSM = 23$**  | **Proposed Price if KSM goes to 500$** |
+|---------------------------|----------------------------------|------------------------|-------------------------------|---------------------------|----------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
+| collectionDeposit         | 0.1 KSM                          | 2.3 $                  | 50 $                          | 0.01 KSM                  | 0.23 $                           | 5 $                                    |
+| itemDeposit               | 0.001 KSM                        | 0.023 $                | 0.5 $                         | 0.0001 KSM                | 0.0023 $                         | 0.05 $                                 |
+| metadataDepositBase       | 0.006709666617 KSM               | 0.15432183319 $        | 3.3548333085 $                | 0.0006709666617 KSM       | 0.015432183319 $                 | 0.33548333085 $                        |
+| attributeDepositBase      | 0.00666666666 KSM                | 0.15333333318 $        | 3.333333333 $                 | 0.000666666666 KSM        | 0.015333333318 $                 | 0.3333333333 $                         |
+
+```
+> Note: This is only a proposal for change and it can be modified upon additional conversation.
+
+## Drawbacks
+The contemplation of modifying deposit requirements necessitates a balanced assessment of the potential drawbacks. Highlighted below are cogent points extracted from the discourse on the [Polkadot Forum conversation](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/polkadot-assethub-high-nft-collection-deposit/4262), which provide critical perspectives on the implications of such changes:
+
+> But NFT deposits were chosen somewhat arbitrarily at genesis and it’s a good exercise to re-evaluate them and adapt if they are causing pain and if lowering them has little or no negative side effect (or if the trade-off is worth it).
+>  -> joepetrowski
+
+> Underestimates mean that state grows faster, although not unbounded - effectively an economic subsidy on activity. Overestimates mean that the state grows slower - effectively an economic depressant on activity.
+>  -> rphmeier
+
+> Technical: We want to prevent state bloat, therefore using state should have a cost associated with it.
+>  -> joepetrowski
+
+
+## Testing, Security, and Privacy
+
+## Performance, Ergonomics, and Compatibility
+
+### Performance
+This change is not expected to have a significant impact on the overall performance of the Polkadot Asset Hub. However, it is crucial to monitor the network closely, especially in the initial stages after implementation, to identify and mitigate any potential issues.
+
+Additionally, a supplementary proposal aims to augment the network's adaptability:
+
+> Just from a technical perspective; I think the best we can do is to use a weak governance origin that is controlled by some consortium (ie. System Collective).
+> This origin could then update the NFT deposits any time the market conditions warrant it - obviously while honoring the storage deposit requirements.
+> To implement this, we need RFC#12 and the Parameters pallet from @xlc.
+>  -> OliverTY
+
+This dynamic governance approach would facilitate a responsive and agile economic model for deposit management, ensuring that the network remains both accessible and robust in the face of market volatility.
+
+### Ergonomics
+The proposed change aims to enhance the user experience for artists, making Polkadot more accessible and user-friendly.
+
+### Compatibility
+The change doesn't impact compatibility.
+
+## Unresolved Questions
+- Determining the optimal new deposit amount that reduces the barrier to entry while preventing state bloat remains a subject for debate. What is the balance that allows for inclusivity without compromising the network's efficiency and security?
+
+## Future Directions and Related Material
+
+If accepted, this RFC could pave the way for further discussions and proposals aimed at enhancing the inclusivity and accessibility of the Polkadot ecosystem. Future work could also explore having a weak governance origin for deposits as proposed by Oliver.