# Votingautomaton.eth **URL:** \ **Category:** Vote Delegation\ **Created:** [June 2, 2021, 5:37pm UTC](https://gov.bancor.network/t/votingautomaton-eth/2308 "2021-06-02T17:37:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 96
**Author:** ![mbr](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex013/user_avatar/gov.bancor.network/mbr/32/3021_2.png) [@mbr](https://gov.bancor.network/u/mbr)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2022, 10:16am UTC](https://gov.bancor.network/t/votingautomaton-eth/2308/96 "2022-03-09T10:16:46Z")
[Proposal to Whitelist Silo Finance (SILO) with 50,000 BNT trading liquidity limit](https://gov.bancor.network/t/proposal-to-whitelist-silo-finance-silo-with-50-000-bnt-trading-liquidity-limit/3452/2) [4](https://gov.bancor.network/t/proposal-to-whitelist-silo-finance-silo-with-50-000-bnt-trading-liquidity-limit/3452/2) > At the time of writing the Silo Finance [main Twitter account](https://twitter.com/SiloFinance?s=20&t=fd2OEYijjmp0JuvQ1Bss9A) has not yet acknowledged the proposal. More importantly, Silo Finance is heavily exposed to inflationary rewards programs such as those offered by the [Convex/Curve ecosystem](https://twitter.com/SiloFinance/status/1500846825187774466?s=20&t=fd2OEYijjmp0JuvQ1Bss9A). It is poor timing for a whitelisting proposal for $SILO. The project itself is not dependent on these kinds of inflationary rewards; Silo Finance creates isolated money markets. The following activity is what is concerning: > " _On Friday [$CVX](https://twitter.com/search?q=%24CVX&src=cashtag_click) price declined, offering a good entry. Knowing that buying with treasury would take 10 days, we decided to buy with dev fund and ask the DAO to reimburse it._" > The Automaton will vote AGAINST. [Proposal: Increase TEMP trading liquidity to 500k BNT from 100k BNT](https://gov.bancor.network/t/proposal-increase-temp-trading-liquidity-to-500k-bnt-from-100k-bnt/3442/5) [4](https://gov.bancor.network/t/proposal-increase-temp-trading-liquidity-to-500k-bnt-from-100k-bnt/3442/5) > This is a large increase. The anecdotes provided by the Tempus co-founder and BD team, are worth taking into consideration: > [@Proposal: Increase TEMP trading liquidity to 500k BNT from 100k BNT](https://gov.bancor.network/t/proposal-increase-temp-trading-liquidity-to-500k-bnt-from-100k-bnt/3442/6): > > GM Bancor community! I’m Josh, the BD Lead at Tempus. Just wanted to echo the views already shared above - there is clearly great demand from our community to participate in the Bancor pool and this liquidity limit increase is much needed to facilitate that. We’d also love to enhance our long term cooperation with Bancor. We would be grateful for your support! > [@Proposal: Increase TEMP trading liquidity to 500k BNT from 100k BNT](https://gov.bancor.network/t/proposal-increase-temp-trading-liquidity-to-500k-bnt-from-100k-bnt/3442/7): > > GM all - this is Dhruv, BD manager at Tempus. Given our community is keen to further participate in the Bancor pool, I agree with David’s and Josh’s view that the capacity increase is needed. Many thanks for your support! > [@Proposal: Increase TEMP trading liquidity to 500k BNT from 100k BNT](https://gov.bancor.network/t/proposal-increase-temp-trading-liquidity-to-500k-bnt-from-100k-bnt/3442/5): > > Hey Bancorians! This is David, co-founder of Tempus. In my opinion this capacity increase is really needed to make the Bancor pool competitive with our Uniswap, Balancer, and Spookyswap pools, which are already well capitalized. We’re pushing through a proposal via Tempus governance to fund the AMM with $750k in TEMP, which we expect to pass before voting on this proposal ends. Thanks for your support! > As DAO liquidity provision on Bancor is likely becoming a key component of the narrative as the project moves into V3, this proposal has a high degree of confluence for both communities. The Automaton is voting FOR the increased capacity of the pool on v2.1. --- _[View the full topic](https://gov.bancor.network/t/votingautomaton-eth/2308)._