written based on Sam's suggestions here the past few days. I think it's a very smart step in the right direction and am very eager to discuss this as a group and arrive at a FIP once input has been provided. h/t @samkazemian
I support this 💪 thanks for getting it up so early too. Let's get working on this in the forums to discuss how to implement it and vote on it in 5 days after the discussion period is over.
maybe pin it so people would know where to look in the tg?
My pleasure! I think this is a big one and hope the community really provides input to iron out the details. It seems like the right move for Frax, FRAX, and FXS!
Being partially unbacked isn’t an issue so long as the CR and AMOs can adjust quick enough to prevent any serious depeg. We’ve had much worse market stress than today and I think everyone is getting a little freaked out about the whole situation.
I may be totally off here but I thought one of the purposes of having adjustable collateral ratio is to be able to scale rapidly. If it’s 100%CR then doesn’t that limit rapid scalability?
The last thing we need to worry about today is scaling. Surviving is all that matters!
I thought the protocol would naturally go towards 100% collateral as confidence decreases and then go back to lower CR as it rebuilds again. That was on of the beauties of the system. Am I missing something?
you can see that fxs droped 50% in value without any fxs minted to keep the peg, if we hadnt had the curve amo collateral we may have seen fxs price drop to sub $1
that's likely where loosening credit standards would come into place; could move to 15%....but i agree, let's focus on the 100% collateralization piece with smaller credit window, then think about how to responsibly scale down the road.
Обсуждают сегодня