Should we elect a council to determine UNIC farming reward weights?

Problem: Currently, we have a bi-weekly whitelisting + rebalancing system where we tweak UNIC reward weights based on constant appraisals.

These appraisals are time consuming, and as we get more and more collections whitelisted, these are taking longer and longer.

Rebalancing the rewards also means that we need to call the "set" function on UnicFarm for every pool. This costs a significant amount of gas.

Solution: Overall, this process was great for the first few months, but it is not the most scalable. Other AMMs (such as Sushiswap, Quickswap) with a larger number of incentivized pools seem to have a council that efficiently determines the reward weighting for each pool.

The council can make the weightings more flexible. This can be quite beneficial. For example:

1. We could give new pools a discretionary boost period that brings more attention to them. This could spur attention on both the demand (fraction buyers) + supply (fractionalizers).
2. We can reward those that support the Unicly ecosystem more. For example, those that give rewards to UNIC stakers (on advanced staking) - incentivizing locked UNIC supply, could get a boost.
3. There will be a need for flexibility with Unicly v2 coming in.