if this were to be implemented, I think a DAO vote would be reasonable before implementing it
I agree that this could be OK, but it’s also a little wasteful. “Burning” protocol fees is not equal to burning governance tokens. Even if the unclaimed amounts are not meaningful, the sum of all of them could represent a good amount of funding for a future proposal or protocol furthering grant or anything. I think the clawback should come as a subsequent proposal after implementing this one (if it ends up being implemented).
I think this would set the StakeWise DAO aside from others in terms of attention to detail and avoiding the waste of valuable resources.
We have the power of programming and mathematics, this yield could not only be adjusted through a DAO vote, but it could also be a dynamic number where a linear (or nonlinear) combination of these variables is considered from the very start. If a way to compute the yield is designed from the start as to give a variable yield instead of a constant one with the purpose of keeping the tokenomics of $SWISE healthy, which with this proposal should be our #1 goal or constraint, then holding $SWISE will be not only be nicely incentivized but also will help keeping $SWISE healthy.
How? i don’t really know, but we can come up with something rad for sure.
Perhaps here I should revive my proposal to flatten uniswap pool rewards and also suggest adjusting the amount of rewards given every month to liquidity providers either prior to this (future) proposal passing or right after it.
that monthly distribution may need to be adjusted in a dynamic manner as well, perhaps using the pool TVL instead of a monthly fixed SWISE amount.
IMO things to consider before this becoming a formal SWIP:
-
create a pool on uniswap v3 for SWISE vs ETH with 0.3% fee (to be consistent with the others) as well as pull StakeWise’s liquidity from 1inch. ← IMO the most important 2 things.
-
rearrange monthly LP rewards in a dynamic manner (as opposed to a fixed amount of SWISE every month), or delay the continuation of the rewards until a DAO discussion on the rewards is held
-
reconsider flattening the pool rewards (i will follow up to my post, ever since i made it ive been monstruously busy to get hands on with it)
-
reconsider the $SWISE staking proposal: Allow staking $SWISE as means of boosting the voting power of long-term token holders - #7 by remche
I think this should be a consideration ^
This is one of those proposals where im not sure if vested $SWISE should have a different treatment, but ill leave that discussion up for grabs \o/