Disclosure: I do hold a small amount of YFI.
For: Reducing UNI rewards to USDT/ETH, USDC/ETH, and DAI/ETH pools by 33% and direct these incentives to the yUSD/ETH pool.
Against: Incentives structure remains the same.
My proposal is simple. To increase the usage of interest bearing tokens in liquidity pools instead of vanilla stable coins, we should reduce (not completely remove) the incentives for vanilla LPs and use it to fund incentives for interest bearing LPs. This benefits both LPs and end users since it makes it easier to use these new interest bearing tokens and LPs continually earn interest on their tokens locked in the pool.
I suggest yUSD as the first interest bearing stablecoin to incentivize because it has the highest interest rate and is the biggest basket currency reducing risk from any one stablecoin collapsing.
Why incentives should be cut:
Would love feedback on this proposal.
Disclosure: I do hold a small amount of YFI.
For: Reducing UNI rewards to USDT/ETH, USDC/ETH, and DAI/ETH pools by 33% and direct these incentives to the yUSD/ETH pool.
Against: Incentives structure remains the same.
My proposal is simple. To increase the usage of interest bearing tokens in liquidity pools instead of vanilla stable coins, we should reduce (not completely remove) the incentives for vanilla LPs and use it to fund incentives for interest bearing LPs. This benefits both LPs and end users since it makes it easier to use these new interest bearing tokens and LPs continually earn interest on their tokens locked in the pool.
I suggest yUSD as the first interest bearing stablecoin to incentivize because it has the highest interest rate and is the biggest basket currency reducing risk from any one stablecoin collapsing.
Why incentives should be cut:
Would love feedback on this proposal.
Honestly I’m in the favour of stopping liquidity mining entirely after this... we don’t need it at all! Mostly whales just farm and dump... food and shitcoins did this to attract users! We already have the largest user base! So best is to entirely scrap liquidity mining after these pools end
Let’s be true to our Uniswap and focus on long term by maintaining growth , stabilty in price, no whales dumping , etc.
Only growth in volume and users is core to Uniswap. Incentivizing yUSD adds both because everyone wants the interest + reduced counter party risk that yUSD offers. It is a superior stable coin in every way, and users and liquidity providers will flock to Uniswap if we offer them easy access to yUSD.
Let’s be true to our Uniswap and focus on long term by maintaining growth , stabilty in price, no whales dumping , etc.
Only growth in volume and users is core to Uniswap. Incentivizing yUSD adds both because everyone wants the interest + reduced counter party risk that yUSD offers. It is a superior stable coin in every way, and users and liquidity providers will flock to Uniswap if we offer them easy access to yUSD.
UNI price and whales dumping the token don't affect us at all. If anything, if Yearn drops the price it is great for UNI bulls because it increases P/E and you scoop more. Yearn has some of the best protocol politicians in the space and have used CRV more effectively than most so they are an asset to have in the Uniswap community.
I think you guys misunderstand or mis-underestimate the yearn system. Your concerns are misguided for two reasons.
I think you guys misunderstand or mis-underestimate the yearn system. Your concerns are misguided for two reasons.
Anyone, including people that don't have YFI or YFI pools, can create yUSD tokens. It will become the base unit of account with pools like $ETH, $WBTC, and $yCRV already attracting a fair amount of liquidity with no incentives.
It's important to note that there is ~$200M of yUSD which make it #66 by total marketcap, yet only ~$9M in liquidity across all yUSD pools on Uniswap ($4.5M in yUSD, only 2% of supply). This is a massive opportunity to attract all that capital.
Supporting yUSD ensures Uniswap's dominance and availability of highly liquid market for a premium token. If we pass this proposal we can attract yUSD liquidity away from other DEXs like creamY where you can swap 100k USDC for yUSD with only 0.1% slippage.
The yUSD-ETH pools for Uniswap and Sushiswap only differ by $3M. If Sushi adds an incentive, do you really want to lose marketshare on a major pool to Sushiswap?
yUSD is great asset for the entire crypto community that provides immense value. Yearn is a major user of Uniswap and supporting their ecosystem is beneficial to Uniswap and in no way detracts from UNI's value (price !== value).
'm not sure where you are getting that idea from. All tokens on Uniswap are from another project including all the tokens being incentivized now. Any whale could overtake any liquidity pool so thats just an argument to cancel all LP incentives. There is no difference between DAI and yUSD in terms of governance and access. Anyone can create them at anytime and they have no relation to the governance of their respective protocols. Also based on protocol performance of Curve, having YFI community contributing to Uniswap will be a big advantage.
This proposal has no relation to the actual YFI token. I disclosed my holdings because I would theoretically profit if this proposal is passed.
YFI price has no bearing on the security of it's products like yUSD. The biggest risk is smart contract risk of the various vaults and strategies which is mitigated by each stablecoin within yUSD having a separate strategy.
If yearn can farm uni we should prevent it or make it less risky! They have a strategy to auto dump dao tokens they farm on the market. (For example :They crashed curve to the curve so to speak..the price of crv is down like 70% since inception and lock up by believers in curve dao..when they locked up most didn't understand yearn strategies..) This yearn farming will not help uniswap! I agree now on dilution of some pools. Let's us be aware UNI isn't mined by "short-term" profit seeking whales. Let's be true to our Uniswap and focus on long term by maintaining growth , stabilty in price, no whales dumping , etc.
Yearn can already farm UNI by allocating their DAI, USDT, or USDC strategies already. This doesn't change how they can influence the system at all. Also there is no yUSD vault (yet) so there is no way for Yearn to allocate yUSD to this pool.
Honestly I’m in the favour of stopping liquidity mining entirely after this... we don’t need it at all! Mostly whales just farm and dump... food and shitcoins did this to attract users! We already have the largest user base! So best is to entirely scrap liquidity mining after these pools end
Let’s be true to our Uniswap and focus on long term by maintaining growth , stabilty in price, no whales dumping , etc.
Only growth in volume and users is core to Uniswap. Incentivizing yUSD adds both because everyone wants the interest + reduced counter party risk that yUSD offers. It is a superior stable coin in every way, and users and liquidity providers will flock to Uniswap if we offer them easy access to yUSD.
Let’s be true to our Uniswap and focus on long term by maintaining growth , stabilty in price, no whales dumping , etc.
Only growth in volume and users is core to Uniswap. Incentivizing yUSD adds both because everyone wants the interest + reduced counter party risk that yUSD offers. It is a superior stable coin in every way, and users and liquidity providers will flock to Uniswap if we offer them easy access to yUSD.
UNI price and whales dumping the token don't affect us at all. If anything, if Yearn drops the price it is great for UNI bulls because it increases P/E and you scoop more. Yearn has some of the best protocol politicians in the space and have used CRV more effectively than most so they are an asset to have in the Uniswap community.
I think you guys misunderstand or mis-underestimate the yearn system. Your concerns are misguided for two reasons.
I think you guys misunderstand or mis-underestimate the yearn system. Your concerns are misguided for two reasons.
Anyone, including people that don't have YFI or YFI pools, can create yUSD tokens. It will become the base unit of account with pools like $ETH, $WBTC, and $yCRV already attracting a fair amount of liquidity with no incentives.
It's important to note that there is ~$200M of yUSD which make it #66 by total marketcap, yet only ~$9M in liquidity across all yUSD pools on Uniswap ($4.5M in yUSD, only 2% of supply). This is a massive opportunity to attract all that capital.
Supporting yUSD ensures Uniswap's dominance and availability of highly liquid market for a premium token. If we pass this proposal we can attract yUSD liquidity away from other DEXs like creamY where you can swap 100k USDC for yUSD with only 0.1% slippage.
The yUSD-ETH pools for Uniswap and Sushiswap only differ by $3M. If Sushi adds an incentive, do you really want to lose marketshare on a major pool to Sushiswap?
yUSD is great asset for the entire crypto community that provides immense value. Yearn is a major user of Uniswap and supporting their ecosystem is beneficial to Uniswap and in no way detracts from UNI's value (price !== value).
'm not sure where you are getting that idea from. All tokens on Uniswap are from another project including all the tokens being incentivized now. Any whale could overtake any liquidity pool so thats just an argument to cancel all LP incentives. There is no difference between DAI and yUSD in terms of governance and access. Anyone can create them at anytime and they have no relation to the governance of their respective protocols. Also based on protocol performance of Curve, having YFI community contributing to Uniswap will be a big advantage.
This proposal has no relation to the actual YFI token. I disclosed my holdings because I would theoretically profit if this proposal is passed.
YFI price has no bearing on the security of it's products like yUSD. The biggest risk is smart contract risk of the various vaults and strategies which is mitigated by each stablecoin within yUSD having a separate strategy.
If yearn can farm uni we should prevent it or make it less risky! They have a strategy to auto dump dao tokens they farm on the market. (For example :They crashed curve to the curve so to speak..the price of crv is down like 70% since inception and lock up by believers in curve dao..when they locked up most didn't understand yearn strategies..) This yearn farming will not help uniswap! I agree now on dilution of some pools. Let's us be aware UNI isn't mined by "short-term" profit seeking whales. Let's be true to our Uniswap and focus on long term by maintaining growth , stabilty in price, no whales dumping , etc.
Yearn can already farm UNI by allocating their DAI, USDT, or USDC strategies already. This doesn't change how they can influence the system at all. Also there is no yUSD vault (yet) so there is no way for Yearn to allocate yUSD to this pool.
What I am saying is that we dont have any need of giving away UNI to yUSD holders, it would cause a liquidity leak as a yUsd whale can come and take advantage of our governance token. Thats why is risky to add a token from another project
What I am saying is that we dont have any need of giving away UNI to yUSD holders, it would cause a liquidity leak as a yUsd whale can come and take advantage of our governance token. Thats why is risky to add a token from another project
What I am saying is that we dont have any need of giving away UNI to yUSD holders, it would cause a liquidity leak as a yUsd whale can come and take advantage of our governance token. Thats why is risky to add a token from another project
I agree this is a concern that should at some point be a rule for distribution.
While I'm all for interoperability and allowing any token the market wants on the system, entangling governance tokens is not a good idea.
A start up who contracted me to build them a blockchain protocol decided to do just that, and started handing out governance to "partners", who were essentially just large users. CEO thought it would be a show of good faith. This resulted in said "partner" locking a number of features fundamental to the start up's business model and really beating up their network.
Honestly I wouldn't want to add any YFI related token, since Andre himself said that the fact that it was traded outside the ecosystem make it lost his value, its price is speculative, thus creating a economic bubble wich could pop out the moment a large YFI holder sell
It's only when you start having an accumulation of UNI held in the contract of other network that problems arise. Just listing them is not so much an issue at all for security.
What I am saying is that we dont have any need of giving away UNI to yUSD holders, it would cause a liquidity leak as a yUsd whale can come and take advantage of our governance token. Thats why is risky to add a token from another project
What I am saying is that we dont have any need of giving away UNI to yUSD holders, it would cause a liquidity leak as a yUsd whale can come and take advantage of our governance token. Thats why is risky to add a token from another project
What I am saying is that we dont have any need of giving away UNI to yUSD holders, it would cause a liquidity leak as a yUsd whale can come and take advantage of our governance token. Thats why is risky to add a token from another project
I agree this is a concern that should at some point be a rule for distribution.
While I'm all for interoperability and allowing any token the market wants on the system, entangling governance tokens is not a good idea.
A start up who contracted me to build them a blockchain protocol decided to do just that, and started handing out governance to "partners", who were essentially just large users. CEO thought it would be a show of good faith. This resulted in said "partner" locking a number of features fundamental to the start up's business model and really beating up their network.
Honestly I wouldn't want to add any YFI related token, since Andre himself said that the fact that it was traded outside the ecosystem make it lost his value, its price is speculative, thus creating a economic bubble wich could pop out the moment a large YFI holder sell
It's only when you start having an accumulation of UNI held in the contract of other network that problems arise. Just listing them is not so much an issue at all for security.
