assume that is an indication that the community is not in favor of standardizing unlocks?
https://gov.frax.finance/t/standardize-ragequit-proposals-and-make-it-a-feature-and-not-a-bug/3016/17?u=lyule67
Please join the discussion and post some feedback, whether for or against.
I've seen
@WethWood @samkazemian @ssmccul @BuenoPues all online recently ... a few moments of your time, gentlemen?
I just don’t care to be honest
Will have to read later but looks slightly over complicated from a quick glance
Well. Thank you for your honesty. I guess I assumed you'd be a little more interested in changes to core protocol functionality. This isn't even "for me" at this point. It's more for flexibility. Things happen. Life changes. Crypto changes. At the rate of innovation present in crypto, people should too have the ability to re-evaluate and change My proposal would block unlocks with CR under 103%, and prevent any unlock from sending it under 103% Being that CR can not be jeopardized, the protocol only stands to gain POL from the action in getting a % of user LP and a refund on all FXS emissions.
By all means, if you feel it can be simplified or have sound reasoning in drastically changing the formula, im all ears. But, to the best of my ability I made it as simple as possible. Everything in the algorithm is a variable, the only two numbers "hard coded" are the 2.5% fee per year of lock time, and the 103% CR requirement. Everything else relies on variables determined per position, per epoch.
Обсуждают сегодня