100% exactly this point @Crypto220 thanks for this comment. SundaeSwap including the Liqwid ecosystem in their initial yield farming program was a demonstrable step in growing our partnership.
SundaeSwap released the 1st AMM DEX and scaled to $125m + in 30 days… They have established themselves as a highly capable team able to build/deploy secure smart contracts, quickly transition to community governance (they are using our Agora module) and SS has hands down the largest DeFi community in Cardano.
Why would the Liqwid community turn its backs to SundaeSwap after they rewarded us with their yield farming program, are already collaborating with us to implement Agora governance contracts and they’ve already delivered a secure, fully functional DEX? Why should this community take on more risk incentivizing a DEX we don’t have an existing partnership with and have not rewarded this community’s liquidity whatsoever? From my perspective it makes very little sense to do this.
This would require a future proposal but yes I think if another DEX were to grow to compete with SundaeSwap in TVL, volume, community size the Liqwid community should absolutely consider adding LP incentives.
While I see most of your points as valid counters, I want to pick on your claim that current congestion on SundaeSwap requires you to set slippage to 80-100%. This might have been true over the first weeks but things have got a lot better since and I’ve done multiple transactions with the default 10% on various pairings, including Sundae and LQ which have completed in minutes to the longest wait being under an hour. I just wanted to point out that the experience is way better already and will only continue to improve as the network upgrades and matures. This has been a wider issue of the Cardano network which has now been somewhat addressed. Thank goodness cause we need these upgrades and more if we want to see Liqwid and other dapps go live too. I know this is completely besides the point but I still felt it’s important to point out, I don’t really see why you chose to include this in your argument.
Like I said I actually agree on a lot of the other points you are making, especially about the timing for this proposal which seems odd, consider so many other dexs are coming out.
Sundae is being stable, And I agree that focusing one DEX so making lower slippage is good way to keep the value of LQ. so I agree focusing on Sundaeswap.
Keeping LQ value is important to makes LQ incentive more attractive.
So more people can continue to pay attention and participate in the LQ service.
We need somewhere close to 3-7 % of the total supply of LQ tokens to be living in LPs on various exchanges as it will provide price stability and liquidity for the LQ token.
So giving a portion of LQ tokens for yeild farming is a great initiative.
Is the proposal for the 17% LQ allocated to staking insurance to be emitted over more than 3 years or is it on the same linear 3 year emission schedule therefore creating a cliff edge? I’d have thought confidence in a long term plan on this might be something to encourage. Can you make a detailed proposal on this aspect?
This is exactly why SS do deserve the allocation of LP incentives; Currently, the DEX is running smoothly and as intended. Yes, the launch was under immense network congestion WHICH was anticipated and communicated via medium article (I Think). TVL is ~$125mil or so, but of course without competition. That’s why, I think, it would be beneficial to allocate 2% of the token supply to SS, then 2% to second-most TVL DEX.
I feel that each of the 5 aspects being voted on deserve an individual vote underneath each change proposed for a more nuanced approach, otherwise it looks like a rubber stamping process.
Point number 5:
While I agree that Sundaeswap has been a resounding success and should get a fair amount of liquidity, I also believe the tokenomics would be better served if we reserved some liquidity for another innovative dex in future on Cardano or even another chain like Ergo when interoperability is more advanced and secure.
The DAO has a 5% reserve. Further, 1% of Net Interest will go to the DAO to build it’s reserves. It could be reasoned that the treasury will have the assets and flexibility to “finance the improvement of the community ecosystem” in the future as it is proposing today. I don’t think this is a one time event, as other DEXs come online and are proven to be a top competitor, we could vote on similar mechanisms for them.
I agree that it would be nice to have a few separate votes breaking this proposal up because there is a lot to digest. Reading through the comments it sounds like most of the community support the new tokenomics just not exclusiveness to Sundae Swap
There is a partnership between Liqwid and SundaeSwap since last summer. Other DEXes probably have or will have their partnerships too with other protocols.
This is s proposal and people have to vote. No central decision imo.
I understand that Liqwid feels like they need to give back to SundaeSwap for being a partner but I think that vote needs to be separate than this one. It is fine to allocate 4% to LP incentives and then vote separate where that 4% goes.
I would also like more info on the Agora Safety Module. Why make us choose between providing liquidity on SundaeSwap and staking on Liqwid. @JakeMN brought up great points.
I agree that it would be nice to have a few separate votes breaking this proposal up because there is a lot to digest. Reading through the comments it sounds like most of the community support the new tokenomics just not exclusiveness to Sundae Swap 