discussion: suggestions pros/cons

ok so, the rule is that over funded amounts return to the general fund, but, we have seen (using Loveras proposal as an example) - the funding page donates every 10 blocks (or not at all for a few days) and people keep donating. So lets discuss the alternatives.

The funds are not the proposers

saved for a rainy day / help a struggling proposal
donate to hacker one .. audits
...

Roll over the funds to the persons 'next ccs'

Pros

Community "saves money" and gets more of what they paid for

Cons

For the historic instances of over funding - if these people do not make a new CCS they would be given the funds as extra, people with recurring CCS' do not gain 'any extra'.
example: Bob had a CCS 2 years ago and was over funded 1 monero. he is given the 1 monero, while Alice , who has a CCS every 3 months gains nothing extra.

After a period of x months - mark the funds for something else

3 months ~ 12 months has been suggested. During this time, the proposer can come forward and say 'thats my money', and they receive it. Pros

Freedom to do with it as they wish (e.g. donate it to themselves ~ their next CCS, the general fund.. an audit.. or [undisclosed])"
This approach does not suffer from the 'fairness' cons as 'rolling over' and allows proposers to make the decision.

Cons

It could give plowsof the opportunity to say 'i will donate the funds back to myself' but he secretly buys himself socks and gains karma points
...

Moving forward / Future proposals

do we adjust the rule 'For donors.2' @ https://ccs.getmonero.org/what-is-ccs/ and remove:

In the event that a proposal is overfunded

This would allow us to spread the over funded amount between milestones as evenly as possible (minus gas) and we never have to think about this ever again.

plowsof / scrape_ccs_fr