FOR: 100 % of all fees generated from Carbon will be used towards repairing Bancors Deficit
AGAINST: Disagree
Overview:
This proposal is straight forward. Until the deficit is completely repaired, all of the fees earned from Carbon will be used towards repairing Bancors Deficit.
The obvious way of repairing the deficit is to use Carbons fees and purchase and burn BNT .
Is there any other way carbons fees could be used to repair the deficit? I am unaware of any other method. Could carbons fees be used towards buying specific tokens and placing them in specific pools? I’m not suggesting this, however, I would like to open this discussion to the community so that we can hold a vote PRIOR to carbons release.
We do not need to wait for Carbon to be released before voting on this matter. How we use carbons fees to repair the deficit may be up for debate, and we should discuss this, however, this proposal is simply voting on how much of carbons fees will be spent towards repairing Bancors Deficit.
If you do not want to vote on this matter now and want to decide after Carbon is released, then explain why below.
Glad to see you’re on board. After a few days - a week, lets formally put this together and wrap this up. The notion of this passing should only strengthen BNT and remove whatever uncertainties it can.
I think there’s some nuance to the method of recovery but sure having a vote on the % of Fees should be fine.
e.g. are all TKN fees used to buy BNT and sent to Vortex burner holding?
all TKN fees sent to separate vaults that just hold TKN that is used to recover missing TKN on withdraw from v3?
all TKN fees sent to v3 pools and exposed to IL in the pool and risk mitigation by Almanak?
this suggestion is great and i fully support it.
the fact that carbon fees are all used to support bancor network is a great way to emphasis the reason why carbon is suggested as a solution to begin with.
Voicing my support. Carbon is unique compared to other AMM-based DEXs in that LPs do not provide liquidity to earn fees, but rather to execute trades at specific prices. Meaning, 100% of Carbon fees can be collected by the protocol and I see no better use of those funds than to eliminate the deficit in v3 / v2.1.
My only other suggestion would be to accumulate the basket of fee’s, and use them as a position on Carbon, with the purpose of earning a higher return.
Much like a treasury, that is used as a position on Carbon.
The buy and sell’s could be voted on by vBNT holders and, the returns would then be used to repurchase and burn BNT/vBNT.
Agree fully with the sentiment here, except that I think (based on discussions elsewhere) that a little bit more clarification would help; 100% of the fees should be used to purchase BNT, for the purpose of immediately burning it. A massive component of the mess LPs currently find themselves in is the drastic supply inflation of BNT, so whilst buying it is nice, undoing the supply inflation after buying it is even nicer. So I’d like for the protocol to commit to a “buy+burn” mechanism, not just stop at a “buy”.
not a bad idea if there are skilled traders that could manage these positions… but it’s also gambling with the revenue that could be simply used to pay down the deficit …
This is a simple no brainer vote of support IMO. Carbon offers a real path to addressing the deficit with V2 & V3 and it only makes sense that all the fees go to this effort until resolved.
100% of all carbons fees will go towards repairing the deficit
or
100% of all carbons fees will be used on buying and burning BNT in order to reduce the deficit
It’s pretty clear that everyone agrees that the fees generated by carbon should be used to repair the deficit, however there may be other ways of repairing the deficit with those fees. I’m not sure what other methods are out there, but if some of the big brains could chip in and throw some ideas around then that would help get this notion settled.
additionally, once this is all agreed upon, we can then start to discuss how to use the fees generated by carbon after the deficit has completely recovered.
these fees can constantly go towards buying BNT which would be good for the bancor ecosystem… or… all of carbons fees can go towards those who stake BNT only … or something along those lines… if bancor implemented something like this then that would create demand for the BNT token … buying and burning BNT would do something similar… but carbons fees ONLY going to those that stake BNT seems better to me… I would then also propose that if bancor is ever in deficit in the future, that all fees go back to buying and burning BNT until any and all future deficits are recovered
I’ve been thinking of other options to for the future of BNT, so I’m with you. I plan on waiting for Mark’s Carbon post that will lay all of that out, since like you said we don’t fully know the details yet. So along those lines I would say we could just focus this vote on something closer to No. 1.
This proposal seems sensible to me given the current deficit in v2.1 and v3. Buying and burning BNT is the quickest way to reduce the deficit across all pools as it will affect them equally. Additionally, I see this as something that benefits everyone in the eco system:
Current BNT holders: BNT accrues value as it is bought from the market and later on burned.
Legacy LPs: If their position is at a loss, then this should slowly start to chip away at the deficit.
Future BNT holders: A token that has deflationary mechanism due to the continuous buying and burning that is occurring.
Fully support this proposal to buy and burn BNT with Carbon proceeds.
