Run an informal vote on potential tokenomics change

General Brainstorm
1

Run an informal vote on potential tokenomics change (informal since gains network is not a DAO). Vote would have informative character to gauge interest for more radical tokenomics changes. It would be done in Tally - the voting power equals the total GNS token the voter has.

The options (open for discussion) would be the following:

  1. Redirect SSS to buyback and burn fully
  2. Partial redirect of SSS to buyback and burn
  3. Status quo, but SSS paid out in GNS
  4. Status quo (SSS paid out in 3 tokens)

Tally #2 would follow to stipulate the detail after the first one is closed.

3 Likes
2

I outlined a medium between options 2 and 3 here, but given these options Iā€™d vote for #2.

2 Likes
3

I would just like to point out that option 1, redirecting full SSS to buyback and burn, essentially removes staking for GNS completely as the value is equally distributed to every GNS token.
Currently ~80% of the GNS supply is staked (historically it has stayed around this), a full buyback and burn model would mean a reduction of ~25% in value received to current stakers.
And due to the thin amount of liquidity for GNS, a full buyback and burn model also rewards the first people to sell more than others.

I propose a different option (option 5):
Partial redirect of SSS to LP for GNS, and partial redirect to collateral vaults to create protocol owned collateral liquidity (can be used when we under-collateralize without minting GNS, making price more stable and attractive) and a portion distributed as we do now or in GNS.
Fees earned by gDAI (or any other collateral tokens) will act as a buffer that will keep growing, in addition to the OC layer, and will reduce the cost of renting stables and eth in the long term, bringing more value to the protocol (GNS holders).

3 Likes