How would that work exactly?

Question

Frax Finance

Sam Kazemian ¤⛓️¤

How would that work exactly?

#cryptocurrency #english #frax

0

22.02.2024

7 ответов

8 просмотров

Mark11

Milan - 米藍 - ميلان
have you seen the FXB idea Samuel (of DeFI flywhee...

It's doesn't solve anything

0

2 месяца назад

Sam Kazemian ¤⛓️¤ Автор вопроса

Milan - 米藍 - ميلان
have you seen the FXB idea Samuel (of DeFI flywhee...

I'll respond on the forum as well after another day or so of overall community feedback, but I explained to Samuel the main issue with the FXB idea is that it will lower the CR of the protocol due to the liability being denominated in FRAX. Only FXS is a volatile asset that doesn't create balance sheet liability. If we had a surplus of treasury over 100% we could even do something from there rather than locked veFXS. The other consideration is the amount of incentives and support Convex has spent over many months for cvxFPIS. If everything was unlocked and done in liquid tokens (say FRAX, FXBs, revenue) the vast amount of CVX emissions that Convex had allocated would be entirely wasted. Lot of factors and complex situation. Overall, I think there should be some changes or options proposed due to a lot of reasonable and civil community feedback. I'll propose some options this weekend in the forum and obviously it won't go up for a vote until even more discussion.

0

2 месяца назад

Jason

Using the revenue from protocol for buy back

0

2 месяца назад

Milan - 米藍 - ميلان

Sam Kazemian ¤⛓️¤
I'll respond on the forum as well after another da...

I see. The convex part is totally unknown to me so I'm sure there's some considerations to be made there. I just thought the inflation of FXS supply >100M tokens is a bad idea because of credibility issues. It would be a bit too easy to turn the moneyprinter on and print some extra shares to solve the problems it feels to me, therefore I figured buyouts with protocol revenue could be an option. Why can't the merger not wait until CR is >100%? Would that take too long? Otherwise its better to spend revenue on the buyout of FPIS and have low rewards on veFXS for some extra time than to inflate the FXS stack. I think that should be avoided at all cost to keep the fundamentals of the project solid and unshakable.

0

2 месяца назад

Mark11

Sam Kazemian ¤⛓️¤
I'll respond on the forum as well after another da...

Also must be addressed the continuing contributor vesting which is 50% of circulating FPIS. I think a good solution would be equivalent liquid FXS for contributors at market value or provide 50% FPI excess balance sheet transferred to contributors and all vested/unvested contributor FPIS burned

0

2 месяца назад

Peazy C

Mark11
Also must be addressed the continuing contributor ...

Love you Mark,

0

2 месяца назад