Being a relatively smaller pool though, if we get to

Question

Being a relatively smaller pool though, if we get to

a stage where most pools are closed using just bnt performance could it at that point be worth pausing the pools and replenishing them directly rather than try achieve the last bit through bnt performance?

#bancor #blockchain #cryptocurrency #english

0

16.02.2024

2 ответов

22 просмотра

Skiznilly

The team have been extremely reticent to do anything like that, or anything that could appear to favour one pool over another. When they were debating over using POL to buy/burn BNT (with BNT supply reduction being cited as the only purpose of POL at the moment), they actively advocated against community proposals to use it for targeting specific pools, even though doing so would have removed at least twice as much BNT from supply (the stated goal of current POL efforts) by having it burned when pools were shut down. The problem with "if we get to a stage where most pools are closed using just BNT performance" is that, since ILP was "paused" on 20th June 2022, all the big (non-stable) pool deficits have essentially worsened or remained stagnant in the 20 months since. Since 6/20, ETH deficit has gone from 41.4% to 60.5%, WBTC was at 61.8% and now at 59.7%, MATIC surged from 19.7% to 73% (guessing partly because they forced LPs into v3 if they wanted to withdraw, thus socialising their deficit), LINK has gone from 46% to 43%.... The only BNT performance that had any significant effect on closing pools was a short-lived pump n' dump in November that wasn't driven by any new utility or metrics of protocol performance and soon reverted (and didn't even allow many LPs to withdraw due to the protocol saying price was too volatile). I think for most remaining LPs, the most realistic scenario is not "when will my deficit be zero" (especially since Bancor actively argues against anything that makes BNT appear more attractive, since they don't wanna get sued), but "at what percentage haircut can I tolerably withdraw". So if you're sitting at a 73% deficit, you might wanna set goals on how big a loss you can comfortably stomach.

0

9 месяцев назад

Tommy Fajita · Accepted Answer

Tommy Fajita

That would be the reasonable and responsible thing to do.

0

9 месяцев назад

210 похожих чатов

Being a relatively smaller pool though, if we get to

2 ответов

Похожие вопросы