WavesN in the forum? It seemed like a very simple and beautiful solution for BR health.
where
https://forum.neutrino.at/t/recapitalization-when-br-1/126/3
Yea just saw it and it's dumb. Hawky summed it up well.
No, forget it. An additional token is garbage. The problem is moon factor.
There is no better idea I've seen in terms of BR health at the moment. If you have a better idea about getting BR above 1, I'd love to know.
No you're wrong and you're all not seeing the point. Neutrino was actually fine (excetpr for the redistribution formula which could have been tweaked) and I was against moon factor but most people were short sighted because they wanted to make their NSBT scarce in the hope that it would turn them into millionaires while in reality all it had caused was a crash in liquidity but that's only the NSBT part. Another big problem were the OTC fees. There was some guy who mentioned this in here but he got kicked even though he had a point. You can't fix Neutrino by adding tokens and that kind of fuckery. Without transparent liquidity for both USDN and NSBT you're never going to solve anything.
t does not have any sense to create a new token. We already have NSBT. If we want NSBT to work better to increase BR, we can just tune their parameters.
Neutrino was fine but we can't just rollback the past. The idea with different utility token for the diferent parts of the ecosystem is good if you are aiming on decentralizing with DAO . Otherwise you would have all under one token and one governance. That would end in an endless discussion about every little change with all waves holders.
In this case we are talking about the same component, not a different one.
What do you mean with transparent liquidity? Surely liquidity for usdn/nsbt is transparent right now? Even though the liquidity might not be at the level we want it to be?
Talking about the gateways as well.
Обсуждают сегодня