Can someone remind me. The USDL is backed by the

number of transactions that happen on the network right?

But a transaction requires USDL. So the USDL cant I guess fund itself. I think I'm missing a step here.

Hi there Providing Clarity USDL will be backed by adoption, staking, trading volume etc. but keep in mind it’s a gas utility token. https://t.me/LGCYNetwork/164257

I know what you're saying, what comes first the chicken or the egg. There is around roughly 30mil USDL in liquidity and the faucet providing it to those who need it for transactions, when enough transactions justify it USDL will be minted which will get it somewhere around the dollar mark.

Oh wow, so do you mean to say 30 million dollars was put into the project, and is the initial liquidity backing USDL? Because your right about the chicken and egg part. I guess its not worth anything until it is then right?? So if its not what I said first, then its like this then I guess? —- gas is essentially free because it is based in USDL, which is a gas token that was created, not backed by anything. So we are supplying USDL for transactions. And when we have enough Dapps building so that a bunch of transactions are happening, and outside money is coming in, to interact with these daps, the transactions themselfs will fund USDL?

https://link.medium.com/MiP2FIERtob

That’s not exactly it. Initial Minted USDL was based on the LGCY market cap at the time of minting as well as minting based on the prestaking rewards. USDL does not need to be funded

No gas is not free it’s low fee but not free

I recommend reading the article and thread first bc it talks about the initial backing of USDL.

Just read the article, thank you. So What I got from it is this: It is essentially just like any and every token. The value backing it is directly related to the value that it brings. There is nothing backing like lets say litecoin, but because its peer to peer and decentralized, people value that, and thats what gives it its value. Like that?

“Oh wow, so do you mean to say 30 million dollars was put into the project, and is the initial liquidity backing USDL?” - LGCY it self was not created through USDL it started off with a pre sale in USDT, USDL came later with staking and to provide a gas and reward mechanism to the chain. “Because your right about the chicken and egg part. I guess its not worth anything until it is then right??” “So if its not what I said first, then its like this then I guess? —- gas is essentially free because it is based in USDL, which is a gas token that was created, not backed by anything.” - Gas (USDL) itself is not free, the team released mainet with staking on LRC and people in order to stake needed gas (USDL) a faucet was created to help out people who needed a bit of it to cover the fees. The faucet was created by Jo, a developer non articulated with the team. “So we are supplying USDL for transactions. And when we have enough Dapps building so that a bunch of transactions are happening, and outside money is coming in, to interact with these daps, the transactions themselfs will fund USDL?” - This part is correct, what do you mean by outside money?

If someone builds a Dapp, and something on the Dapp costs 0.07Eth on the LGCY Network (WETH) They would take their initial ETH, and bridge it to the LGCY Network. So that was money that came from somewhere else (outside money) not on the LGCY Network, and it then came onto the network. Outside money coming into the network via Dapps

It’s different Litecoin is not designed to be backed by the network nor is Litecoin designed to be a gas coin for the network. USDL was designed to process transactions on the network. Apples to oranges comparison

The thing is that in order to be able to deploy these contracts you’d need USDL instead of the WETH.

Sorry for still seeming to be missing the key point. My apologies. I guess an answer to the following statement would help A transaction doesnt have any inherent value. A transaction is a action, and event, it doesnt have value So wondering how do transactions (which are occurrences) can be backing the stable coin USDL

Now on the liquidity part let’s say people bring ETH or other assets liquidity it’d work through bridges that will come later and properly documented. The deployment of the contract on LGCY would require USDL.

So if you dont have USDL, then you need to buy it. And this is what will be backing it? Outside money buying USDL to fufill their transactions?

Our main argument is that a transaction does have value, and that it should be a set price not variable like most chains.

Yes if you don’t have USDL you’d need to buy it, currently there’s no acquiring options available, but will come at it’s time. It’s one of the options to back it correct.

Essentially saying, the transaction is to do something that you want to do. You can not do that thing without going through the transaction. The reason why you want to do that transaction in the first place is because whatever it is, has value to you like that?

Yeah that’s good. We like to think of usdl as a receipt for interacting with the network.

Thats super meta haha. Really cool