Proposal: Set the V3 Vortex to 90%

[foxsteven]

This proposal is expected to appear on Snapshot for voting on 2022-07-17T15:00:00Z. Make sure to stake your vBNT for voting before this date and time to participate in the DAO decision.

TL;DR

• Given the existing deficit, it seems like any solution will likely include, at least for some time, a high network fee.
• All the options in the proposal below and in the vast majority of the over 100 comments seems to include high network fee/vortex:

Feedback Request: Potential Direction for Recovery

poll TL;DR This proposal reflects the personal opinions of the author This is not a fully baked plan, rather, this is a direction that I think is appealing and I’m asking for feedback, questions, further contributions, support, counter arguments and comments The short term goal is to create the best possible scenario for all parties The long term goal is to create a robust model that we as a community can further build upon Both models outlined below stick largely with the Bancor V3 system as …

• Given this, why not set the V3 vortex to 90% now?

Summary

• A detailed summary of the situation and approaches are here: Feedback Request: Potential Direction for Recovery

Implementation

• V3’s vortex is not yet implemented
• Given that the protocol is likely to undergo larger changes, it does not make sense to continue to build the vortex now and the make a new one after changes are made (for context read this [Feedback Request: Potential Direction for Recovery - Feedback Request: Potential Direction for Recovery
  *The collected BNT are here under pendingNetworkFeeAmount Bancor: Bancor Network V3 | Address 0xeEF417e1D5CC832e619ae18D2F140De2999dD4fB | Etherscan
• Its about 174,000 BNT at time of writing

FOR - Set V3 vortex to 90%
AGAINST - Make no Changes

[lesigh]

I’m strongly for this proposal. It seems like all roads lead to this - let’s go for it.

[foxsteven]

Should I move it to level 1?

[TheOneJM]

I also support this. But I believe we should get the vortex started in B3 to take advantage of the fees that have been collected.

There’s no benefit to taking fees away from LPs and continue to do nothing with it.

That being said, I think that’s a different conversation and think we can move this to L1.

[lesigh]

Yes please . This seems like a no brain for our current situation.

[TheOneJM]

I’m starting to think that we should hold off on this until there’s a plan for the fees.

I understand that all proposals are heading this way.

But if you start taking 90% of LP fees, and don’t do anything with those fees for a long time, then LPs are going to be even more upset than they are now.

Since all proposals have converged on using the vortex to burn vBNT, should prioritizing turning on the vortex in B3 also be part of this proposal?

[sylentz]

@TheOneJM

But if you start taking 90% of LP fees, and don’t do anything with those fees for a long time, then LPs are going to be even more upset than they are now.

Are TKN LPs really sticking around NOW for the 5% APR when they are at 30-60% deficit ratio? I dont think fees/returns are TKN priorities.
But I do agree that cranking v3 Vortex without the ability to burn fees is going to cause confusion.

[eldude]

Its clear this is the direction - lets do it

[TheOneJM]

Absolutely won’t make a difference to them.

But that won’t stop them from using this as added fuel for how Bancor is “stealing” from them or whatever the latest fud is.

[glenn]

Even though the vortex is not yet implemented in version 3 of the protocol, note that for any BNT → TKN swaps the protocol is collecting fees in TKN and a portion of this is being swapped to $BNT (depending on the vortex percentage, currently at 30%).

There are some benefits in the sense that the swap is happening internally from TKN–>BNT even though that BNT is “sitting” and not being used for burning vBNT ATM. An argument can be made, that this action of $BNT buying over time should help close the deficit naturally.