completely agree. a multi pronged approach should repair the deficits the fastest… and will probably be best for bancor long term.
generate fees in various ways
+
add additional utility to the bnt token
1 Like
I agree the path to recovery involves a big feature along with more integrations and a proper fee distribution, all of them are mandatory.
That’s why 90% of my time right now is assessing big ideas one vs the other and I know others in the community do that as well.
Remember there are many big features that were initially planned for B3, the question is which one has the highest short term ROI (along with new ideas), so that the protocol can recover in the quickest possible way.
And then once work on the best feature is ongoing, the community can continue debating which method above makes the most sense for parallel implementation, for that optimization on top of the big feature and long term (explosive :)) value.
4 Likes
Clarification: what do you mean by “cuts the long tail from the protocol”?
good q, not clear language from me.
I mean the tail risk of the recursive death loop. I believe the protocol is optimized to not have this happen over time, but extreme scenarios (like last May and June) can’t be modeled. So they are “tail risks” or “the long tail” in my earlier comment.
Poor word choice, but that’s what I meant.
2 Likes
Would really like an opinion from you to this proposal. (just copied from discord since i cant word it better anyway)
Tokenizing debt and selling it is a damn good option. Sell the debt token at a price relative to the deficit (While the deficit is high, the price is high), and direct the vortex to those that bought it. Meaning if only one person has bought, they receive 100% of vortex that is currently going to burning vBNT. (Currently 90% in v3). As more purchase the debt, the vortex is distributed between them. As the debt is purchased (and thus lowered), the price of the debt token is also lowered, which correlates with the decreasing rewards from the vortex. Once the deficit is gone, these debt tokens can be staked and used for insurance in the protocol some way or another, with the promise of a guaranteed percentage of fees that Bancor as a whole generates.
So far all other proposals and suggestions are great for when things are actually functioning properly.
This would relax the whole situation and restore faith in the devs, protocol and the future of Bancor. Do you think its a good idea and if not please explain in detail why.
2 Likes
made a rough proposal here, which should be at least an option for Lps AND BNT holders. although this (i think) would be easy to implement, relieve preassure from devs. Please be so kind and take a look.
1 Like
Is it possible to run a node and stake all the link and eth locked in the protocol? could even stake the ICO Eth to help generate more revenue?
2 Likes
Start a integration hackathon for 7 days
2 Likes