DFIP-2211-D: DUSDLOCK pools to lockup DUSD #236
Comments
Graciaho
changed the title
Graciaho
changed the title
|
signmessage 8S8PY5NFD1BsEwhJg1ddxNqptCJ68BgDKN "DFIP-2211-D-no" |
|
signmessage 8LFHgHz2QmtJpe3bchv6YtX4rybD8473zQ DFIP-2211-D-yes |
|
signmessage 8daGYPTDTzMRtUx61uWRjg7p9GECMjuip8 "dfip-2211-D-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8MXn7LR75PA8dFny44d1aJHU41LudvA5YP DFIP-2211-D-neutral |
|
signmessage 8RJM58PhPWKy8ufcbHwtxHLrByEyCM5Pey "DFIP-2211-D-yes" |
|
signmessage 8XJgucSumRC6mkqhrNK8h14kVCkkV1Wfma "DFIP-2211-D-yes" |
|
signmessage 8VKs5jqADhwRTHVXsf8hhMmJm5r8FpWF7h dfip-2211-d-yes |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8YD75rAQuNNJupSWHGfnJdHCGmqFKVcejS "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8JrTmBk6NiiaQhTA9p2egmDLWTYRQ69MR9 "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8ReRcJjhJY61Y6tHYfQhkUk6CSyVTq18Z3 "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8JULybfNANdJfgaxbhpwGPzHsb2q6rN2xU "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
signmessage 8GxEcrsrR96EEtcbii1kM64LPXW92QzGZQ "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
signmessage 8bTcuVA2TTtA1dUsmXW5Xs1PfeEcqbMYeW "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8WYgBxs8bXQkbiXKnZCe8utjDvuceaDGY1 "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8FRiNcUVud7B8Kw7nmnZ3jp3Pw7wQ4AQAy "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8RKgsRnAGBcmwouuFdSjMFitDNLH5qegY2 "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8Fgtktf4Y2DNYin6ZCAUreUu8kGGm8VsRy "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8ccminZPSFox6bRseAgdqLccKvLs2aGHtr "DFIP-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8V3tf3kPf7K3J5vE7QXUXUEYyQG9YJc5re "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8adjFmpmdACKuZheqLYnRkGMn8sFUXcUgm "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8NzcJXvs6MSyXE9E5nN4V6pa3pgR16SAwH "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
only dfp I vote YES $ defi-cli signmessage 8Vm9Xt1pB7vzkJdCaJihT4rKKMjmLkdUDC "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8bKhKFFn5H2c5C9B7ckspfmwsuG47RRPnL "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8FzCNgP2FFXvrSdgUqBH2u3N2vPZjMBzK8 "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8bBeQHeeUxvqY3k5RYR7x4eceeW9nUXjeq "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8Jv2n6XkEsVxQnoA9yS9nsRMLmP69Kpbec "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
signmessage 8b5QJxmxm6PWpzL4GkrT4KVJBcUyh3yNJG "DFIP-2211-D-yes" signmessage 8NmuiLWL22giTtpLFzAJpVTkEHhuqBiUmX "DFIP-2211-D-yes" |
|
defi-cli signmessage "8bPt28EHM1Tabbkd1ZMmNydXVty8wofCXA" "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
signmessage 8JdbYYdXc4VaTmihQndAbutHURWU1MLDat "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8Mi2HCxKV2onjkWwXV1sASxynHP5SRdRrA "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
defi-cli signmessage 8JH1oqEbY6fiP614Z4wJ41YNtXKzVdEwLH „DFIP-2211—D-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8RGyUGfGY6aZpYZy8fYFA5s3Q5AeAk6BQ1 "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8GoBZyUjQdZZjWaUms1TxmSx8D8vydW5Up "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
signmessage 8X9mSBVoeFfsk7XyAJmYCGu4SgrQzMj7Ud "dfip-2211-d-yes“ |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8dAtCmA6WHrSsanA867VmnA53itpStRLvD "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
signmessage 8ZazLdqc7T5au7jgUDhj2YYP2BKzEzcWNL "DFIP-2211-D-yes" |
|
signmessage 8Mh6ahTqoyDo4mKeAoCBE3c666wTQnztqx "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8NgFhGVVyaFMkmJetFENyAb98twmmrHhdB "dfip-2211-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8eAuuamYvdjpn7YBoiqT6PEhTJqc62tpCV "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8dmZYAZQPTzCQtXhxps9go1zFTw9iSBtyA "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8armyAkvqjggi3Gtyy9N9S3BugpEV9QihP "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8TZkvfzssMJh5LQFqeAdnveS6aZ92RRLJ3 "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
Votes of the DFX Community Individual votes can be viewed transparently here: Votes: |
|
signmessage 8XjGQuumUBGyevsG8Jn4yZQ6QBpkA4ukgM DFIP-2211-D-yes |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8Qy6nhf1HxXakfFyGPuZSh8crum24pQ7ux "dfip-2211-d-yes" |
|
and others
DFIP Overview
Goal
Currently we have too many free DUSD (specifically algorithmically created DUSD) within the ecosystem. The different burn mechanisms help to reduce them over time. For a faster solution and restoring the peg we need to remove DUSD from the system. We believe the best way to do that is by creating incentives for users to (temporarily) remove their DUSD from the supply. This can be done by providing a way to lock up DUSD and receive rewards for it.
The goal is to lock 30-60 mio DUSD to remove the excess algo-DUSD from the system. Reduced supply and possibly increased demand is a strong support for the DUSD price. With the lockup this reduced supply will stay for a longer period which gives the ecosystem time to stabilize itself.
Proposed mechanism
We propose to introduce 2 new tokens (DUSDLOCK1 & DUSDLOCK2) with corresponding pools (DUSDLOCK1-DUSD & DUSDLOCK2-DUSD) and a bot each which converts DUSD into DUSDLOCKx. The conversion back to DUSD will be activated 1 & 2 years after activation of the pools. So the lockup of DUSDLOCK1 is 1 year, lockup of DUSDLOCK2 is 2 years.
Those new pools receive the rewards currently used for the burn-bot + 50% of the stablecoin-pool rewards. Rewards are payed in DFI (standard LM-rewards) but are capped by $16 per block (not needed rewards stay in the original pool or go back to the burn-bot).
When total DUSD algo-ratio falls below a defined value, the lock is lifted early. For DUSDLOCK1 this early exit threshold should be 30%, for DUSDLOCK2 it's 20%.
To not shock the system in the other direction, the total amount of lockable DUSD should be limited to 100 mio. If the $-value limit is hit, those 100 mio would still receive 16% APR.
Suggested implementation details
The final implementation is defined by the devs of course. The goal of this proposal is to minimize the needed dev-resources, so to clarify we are adding some suggestions on the implementation side. From our understanding, none of this requires a hardfork.
min(25% of dToken-rewards, $16 / DFI-price). Currently that would be 11.7 DFI/block or $7,6/block. This would mean 30% APR on 26 mio DUSD total locked within those pools. At the $16/block cap, it would result in 56 mio DUSD locked for 30% APR, or 56% APR on 30 mio DUSD.Arguments for some of the specific points
How does this DFIP benefit the DeFiChain community?
Reduced supply and possibly increased demand of DUSD is a strong support for the DUSD price. With the lockup this reduced supply will stay for a longer period which gives the ecosystem time to stabilize itself. A stable peg will finally bring the DEX fee down, which will bring the utility of the dToken system fully back. This restores confidence in the overall DeFiChain ecosystem which will be a strong benefit for the overall community.
Non-obligation
I understand that vote of confidence for DFIP carries no obligations by any developers to implement the proposals. DeFiChain is a community projects. Pull requests can be submitted by community and reserved to be evaluated for safety and general community acceptance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: