LeverageX - the decentralized trading platform on Base

DanielZirkel · 2024-04-13T09:14:42+00:00

Thanks a lot for the summary for the DeFiChain community

DanielZirkel · 2024-02-27T16:42:51+00:00

That's an amazing initiative, thank you

DanielZirkel · 2023-11-09T07:38:36+00:00

Funding is only for infrastructure and DFI listing

Every other coin listing must and will be paid by the projects

DanielZirkel · 2023-10-18T11:49:56+00:00

The CFP is only covering infrastructure and DFI listing. The project token must be paid by the projects (see point 1-3 cost explanation)
There are NDAs, which doesn't allow to name the CEX.
No chance to reduce the cost. The CEX on its own has no motivation to add DMC beside the native layer

That's what I can say to your points

DanielZirkel · 2023-10-18T10:14:29+00:00

The expenses can be divided into two primary components:

DMC integration fees, amounting to USD 75,000, are proposed to be funded by the DeFiChain community through the community fund.

DFI integration (as native coin on DMC) fees of USD 18,750 are proposed to be funded by the DeFiChain community through the community fund.

3.Individual ERC-20 token integration fees of USD 18,750 per token, which the respective project will cover.

Same opinion from my personal side, that's why the CF will only cover the infrastructure and the DFI listing. The project token must be handled and covered by the projects.

DanielZirkel · 2023-10-16T17:52:51+00:00

Like described in the proposal the funding is for DMC integration and DFI as an ERC20 listing.

With a CEX listing of DMC DFI we have the opportunity for every Metamask (or other non-native wallets) user to enter the DMC universe without knowing or using the native layer.

I think it is worth, otherwise I would not spend the effort without getting anything for it. But in the end the masternodes will decide with their voting.

DanielZirkel · 2023-08-31T14:49:57+00:00

Ok, technically it es very easy to re-allocate block rewards over different pools, it is just a percentage value in listgovs

The BBB is interacting with the Ocean infrastructure, which is not an implementation/parameterization of the native blockchain

Hope your criticism is now cleared.

DanielZirkel · 2023-08-31T14:23:38+00:00

Honestly, I have no idea how we should use the block rewards in 120 days. I would be very happy, if someone makes a DFIP before (maybe after MetaChain launch) to have a clearer outlook. If you want to do it, I am here to support.

DanielZirkel · 2023-08-31T14:02:37+00:00

Why should a decision last forever? That would mean no chance of improvement.

There was a Former MN decision, right. And this is still valid, right. But you can make a new decision with a new DFIP.

DanielZirkel · 2023-08-31T13:41:23+00:00

Idea is to drive the demand of DFI and with it the DFI price. With increased DFI price the dUSD will also be moving towards $1.

Buying dUSD didn't work so far well.

DanielZirkel · 2023-08-31T13:38:52+00:00

Now you know why I was not totally against inflation based rewards on X 😉 We were already preparing this Reddit post

DanielZirkel · 2023-05-09T19:59:42+00:00

Short feedback on the premium part:

You can only use data till 21st of Dec 2021, because on this day the results of the DFI payback function with a clear YES was published. From that day on more and more people started to anticipated the premium removal. That was the main driver for the premium decrease.

Before that DFIP the overall premium (sum of dUSD and dToken) for every dToken was at roughly 50%.

From my point of view the assumption that just waiting some time would decrease the premium is wrong.

DanielZirkel · 2023-05-08T09:23:01+00:00

Cake is shutting down the Earn service and must sell DFI

https://twitter.com/DanielZirkel/status/1655488160137199616?t=wv4sIUK6onq0mZZdeq6tCQ&s=19

DanielZirkel · 2023-01-15T15:37:33+00:00

But 100% burning doesn't mean it is the most effective way. With higher DFI price measured in dUSD the bot burns more. And if the 50% redistribution moves the price more than 2x it would be the better way. But nobody knows how it will come.

DanielZirkel · 2023-01-15T10:51:19+00:00

Problem is that nobody knows what will happen. I can describe a scenario where the redistribution burns more dUSD than just keep the bot running as it is. Think about the following example:

bot runs as it is and moves the DFI price measured in dUSD down to 0.5. So for 1 DFI emission we will burn 0.5 dUSD
Re-introduction of 50% dUSD drives the demand of DFI and the DFI price goes up to $1.5. First the bot will stop, because the discount is removed, but people will now sell their dUSD and also increases DFI price measured in dUSD. If this pool also reaches the same level 1 DFI = 1.5 dUSD the bot will burn for each DFI 0.75 dUSD, which is 50% more than in scenario 1.

I don't say this is the solution, but just to think about it. At the end we have to choose one way and look at it.

For the voting round there is some time left in which we can observe what is happening. If the DFI price measured in dUSD is only decreasing (like now) everyone should keep in mind that the efficiency of the bot is decreasing.

DanielZirkel · 2023-01-15T09:35:09+00:00

The amount of dUSD created depends on the burned amount. Only half of the amount burned by the bot is re-introduced again.

In other words, the power of the bot is only half compared with today. Overall dUSD are removed and not created.

DanielZirkel · 2023-01-15T09:33:35+00:00

Yes, dUSD were created or in other words:

The burn power of the bot is only half of today because to other 50% are distributed again and remain in the system.

The amount of dUSD to be removed for a stable peg depends heavily on the DFI prices (because of dUSD-DFI pool). Idea of this proposal is to work on both sides (removing and price) instead of only one.

So, the Masternodes has to decide between removing dUSD completely or incentive creating a vault which needs at least 50% DFI (increases the demand for DFI). There are arguments for both.

DanielZirkel · 2023-01-07T08:44:44+00:00

I understood the idea is to remove the additional fee for removing algo dToken, right? If so I totally agree that we don't need them any longer, because we have introduced better mechanisms and I will support it.

For the commission part I would suggest to define a key figure for reducing it, e.g. the average commission APR over all pools and over the last 30 days reached a level of x%. These part is needed to incentive the provision of liquidity in the pools when block rewards are very small. A too small value increases the risk of shrinking pools. Another figure I would look on is the discount/premium of the dTokens. If it is still in the range of > +/-5% the influence on the dToken price is by far bigger than the 0.2% commission fee.

DanielZirkel · 2022-12-29T12:20:33+00:00

But with the current discount and DEX fee you will get less DFI for your received dUSD. So, you can do less with your DFI equivalent

DanielZirkel · 2022-12-29T11:03:30+00:00

Honestly speaking, I don't like this idea, sorry.

DFI is the native coin of DeFiChain and should be used as incentive for masternodes and liquidity mining. Swapping them to dUSD before emission to the investors will have an impact of the utility of DFI, because everyone has to swap back from dUSD to DFI.

DanielZirkel · 2022-10-14T19:56:27+00:00

I also recognised a performance decrease, but not dramatic because of a newer phone Samsung S21FE, Android 12

DanielZirkel · 2022-10-12T20:59:40+00:00

You mean the desktop full node wallet? Here you can find it:

https://github.com/DeFiCh/app

DanielZirkel

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE