I hear you @Andre1; the good news is that your “linear TVL” proposal is almost identical to the time multiplier in my proposal formula, except that in my proposal this multiplier only ranges from 1 to 2 (which was not chosen for any particularly good reason), while for the linear TVL formula it should range from 1 to 86.26 (i.e. by how many times TVL grew during the eligibility window). I think this is more rational than arbitrarily having it run from 1 to 2, so I think we should adopt it.
I think it will also partially address your concern about the balance of social and capital weights. I agree that 95-5 appears imbalanced, but I don’t see a way for anything closer to 50-50 to keep the “floor” amount at 20 COMP without significantly inflating the 500,000 COMP request (we would already be asking for a 9% boost to bring the 95-5 distribution floor up to 20 COMP).
FWIW a 50-50 distribution shifts the floor to about 10 COMP – with the other ~10 COMP per small user (and by small we’re talking anyone under millions of USD equivalent supplied/borrowed) going mostly to a handful of very deep-pocketed users, as any capital-weighted distribution would do.