Hello! So my proposal regarding the fee switch is broken down into two parts:
Accumulating fees via fee switch.
Distribution of fees in the form of LP.
Whereas (1) should focus on maximising revenue and (2) should adapt in accordance with the DEX’s needs.
(1) does not really care about anything else except for targetting the best pools to “flip the switch”, it should track metrics and adapt to the trend.
(2) cares about the liquidity management. This is where MinSwap’s needs are taken into account and the distribution is decided by governance.
I think (1) & (2) are different beasts and should be discussed separately.
I personally think (1) should be “mathematical” and (2) project need oriented.
Why can’t we add the utility for $MIN #hodlers to buy the $ADA at a premium (for example 10%) with $MIN/$ADA, $MELD/$ADA, $WTM/$ADA, $LQ/$ADA, and $AADA/$ADA LP tokens?
If you #hodl x amount of $MIN tokens, you’ll get access to swap your LP tokens for $ADA.
I am also in favor option1.!
As Jwolf mentioned above, If we take option2 then we have to consider the realignment of farm allocation first.
I am very cautious to make this vote in governance votes but in favor of making votes because we need to see and hear the voice of users.
I choose option I. Option 1 is preferred to increase the use value of the dex and the long life of minswap. Option 2 has not been appreciated in this period because the volume and profit of dex are still low and the product of the asset basket in option 2 has no guarantee of their success. I only give priority to existing products. and widely used.
Interesting Idea. I am in favor of option 1. However, I see this as taking some of the profits from LP’s which are meant to offset IL. You can’t do that and expect TVL to remain as high. It will inevitably lead to a weaker DEX overall. However, boosting the value of the POL is essential to a healthy DEX as well. Therefor I am in favor of a different approach. I propose we implement option 1 with the Fee Switch taking a portion of the Fixed 2 $ADA Fee and Zap into the $ADA/$MIN Pool. Same effect without undercutting the LP’s which are one of the most important parts of a good DEX.
This seems like a good, and logical path. To first do it with MIN/ADA and establish a framework later for adding assets. That being said lets see what the DAO votes between the 2 options.
Its only a very small amount of the LP tokens (only 1/6 of the fees earned, which as u know are increasing the LP amount). This will cause some very marginal sell pressure.
However, we will want to vote to include more assets in the POL. We can vote as a DAO to include not only MIN but other tokens to not be sold.
There should be a method to buyback mun token and burn it. Even major blockchain dex don’t have this supply of dex token. Over time more min token will be released in market. Those holding minswap token will not be having any benefit of holding it. So better to think about sustain burning mechanisms of min token
Question … if Prop. 2 is chosen will there be a subsequent vote to decide which tokens to put in the basket if so wen, further more how many tokens to choose? IE. 3 tokens (WMT, YUMMI, LQ) 7 tokens ( EMP, GRASS, NFTC, MELD, INDY, LQ, HEX) … etc.