DFIP-2205-D: Disable the DUSD Burn Fee #145
Comments
uzyn
changed the title
|
Updated the title from "dToken burn" to "DUSD burn" as I believe that it's a typo. Let me know if I'm mistaken. |
|
signmessage 8cZqD6X14ipFqmvz6pYYR5p7Dp5n4xc9VT "DFIP-2205-D-yes" |
|
signmessage 8RJM58PhPWKy8ufcbHwtxHLrByEyCM5Pey "DFIP-2205-D-no" |
|
signmessage 8VKs5jqADhwRTHVXsf8hhMmJm5r8FpWF7h dfip-2205-d-yes |
|
|
Is there any way that I can withdraw this DFIP? In the current situation, it no longer makes sense. Or could I still change it to: Removing the dUSD burn fee at the dUSD pool when buying dUSD. DFI -> dUSD no burn fee |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8FzR1vtCgqp7moFnATtptcSZbgsRhsQjnz "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
defi-cli signmessage "8LaQQZhfYiLukaZM9qekTB1b7UAR3Bapn2" "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8QHLgmQVqMFQyN3cjPU2EDoKv7enHKstyn "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8WpKkyyMdDQVnuYxZ87aqremVQ4GKnRTJL "dfip-2205-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8Kb3rhUXKye9a8UV73a5iiCgCX8BENe63F "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8J9DBy8o5fHTrrYtsaSkPmftHiiZFQHDi8 "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8LZvqY8roXp5SjgKQ8GzuCC5LXcfAZPcbJ "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8Qcpm3NwpwSBnyD8xzKwppe4upZ4RFYpQo "dfip-2205-d-neutral" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8V77Hhv6pen56H54LJSwt7b3SYjDAgGJBr "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8MSBPBdsQvUgWxhLt2hqkrv5zwCPPGTDYp "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8cQFXX6jTJAQdSB1zLCmJ11hFZ5eqUDYJQ "dfip-2205-d-yes" |
|
signmessage 8VKs5jqADhwRTHVXsf8hhMmJm5r8FpWF7h dfip-2205-d-no |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8GCKyUYHw51D6be61jNNUhEfEEddtThbAZ "dfip-2205-d-neutral" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8FRiNcUVud7B8Kw7nmnZ3jp3Pw7wQ4AQAy "dfip-2205-d-yes" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8SW9FEuf7KsTiGGWJP65XbPo5P7NiNCfa6 "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8T8Qq5yr2BciNjzXerE4q2GXoa8vfD2awh "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8NkSW9c5npPKHqKQimpma51J5GsRBEX5Zo "dfip-2205-d-neutral" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8UuvfXfPHECLf4ZAswjA1GBqvjdXwtzPVq "dfip-2205-d-neutral" signmessage 8WrcPiaoGhQgitWiBG6e3fW7dVTuZMvjot "dfip-2205-d-neutral" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8YBcHsAMiQkVSdmRutroDJYzhmk7XfPrme "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8RfKj4DqdsBkyP42MazGXgS3YGYyzHVpJ7 "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8JQQ3zxrmgMFrY7qGScws5RnYL93xv2Qs1 "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8PQGqdFDFKBXB1pcBzHJpanDnuutYaih8q "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8Vm9Xt1pB7vzkJdCaJihT4rKKMjmLkdUDC "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
signmessage 8P24qRzccs9FJXkqrrzPZGa2aNXxqBkrmb "DFIP-2205-D-no" |
|
signmessage 8cS4WTshRjjhKJ5fizs7tNmK49yRufM5Vt dfip-2205-d-no |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8a1mVdhy2jg8By2yXM3RbCy4zQM597QF5e "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8SxytTDhbwr4TdywMnKDr98hfnKieNmM1i "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8TAaQUPVXwE1C8P7jxuM8GSSC9sWXyFNFQ "dfip-2205-d-neutral" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8NEQkS8p4LgkipRoJ4EEdTSHjPg7kXZA84 "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8b3aUSsyxM5CovYEWdwrpGafK386WQEAfM "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
Votes of the DFX Community Votes: signmessage 8KirKNGVgrsQsmWuy1Ee4ZmsnXVVkAEzh2 dfip-2205-d-no |
|
signmessage 8dJLcKddBnwXzzXBLeZLYqzHehfeB8UWa2 "DFIP-2205-D-no" |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8abZCfXnX4qg63ms273ez2pPY3GefLAh2s "dfip-2205-d-no" |
|
signmessage 8S4J5K9ohSkxgbYFc2Cbfmf3rf6WjfYH8T dfip-2205-d-no |
|
$ defi-cli signmessage 8TtRR25SoDMffc3V2Tm2sFr4Sx6iodj7wP "dfip-2205-d-no" |
mnstate_validate.log |
and others
DFIP Overview
previous discussion: https://www.reddit.com/r/defiblockchain/comments/u1vowi/my_thoughts_on_the_current_problem_of_defichain/
discussion for alternative: https://www.reddit.com/r/defiblockchain/comments/uatcr7/recent_changes_in_the_dtoken_mint_mechanism/
Describe your proposal
Deactivate the dUSD burn fee
Through arbitrage trading, open dUSD loans, the large amounts of dUSD burn through futures, the dUSD should also be kept at 1$, as it was before the introduction of the burn fee. Thus, the dUSD burn fee serves no additional purpose, which is not already covered otherwise. For large sell-offs we need an alternative solution.
The DFIP 2122-A should stabilize the dUSD price at$1. Especially the part when the dUSD hedges above 1$ works very reliable. Now first a 0.1% dUSD burn fee was charged at the dUSD pool and since the last hardfork also additionally at all other pools which contain dUSD. The purpose of this fee is to regularly remove uncovered dUSD and thus not let the price fall below 1$.
In the current situation, new dUSD are still being printed regularly. This means that the regularly born dUSD will be reprinted very quickly. So it is questionable whether the dUSD burn fee will actually do anything to stabilize the price.
We already have many small mechanisms which keep the dUSD at 1$, like e.g:
burn through interest rates burn by FutureSwap ( already 15.000.000 dUSD in the first two weeks )
arbitrage trading
open dUSD loans
The price of dUSD should remain stable in the current situation even without the dUSD burn fee, so the dUSD burn fee does not fulfill any significant benefit, but reduces the benefit of our unique defichain system.
Previously, we were among the cheaper defichain systems with a total fee of 0.2% by commissions only. Now we have the highest transaction fee in the DefiSpace for dTokens. This has now been increased from 0.2% to 0.4% ( 0.2% Commission, 0.1% dToken BurnFee, 0.1% dUSD Burn Fee ). This makes Defichain less attractive compared to other DefiSystems. Also, everyone has to go through the dUSD pool with 0.3% total fees before buying a dToken.
Through the higher total fee we have also harmed the arbitrage trade. This provides for more stable prices and for significantly more commissions. Commissions are important to ensure high liquidity in the long term, regardless of the block rewards.
I otherwise only hear the argument that the dUSD Burn fee promotes the DFI Burn. However, I think many here don't see the system as a whole and are blinded by the idea of a price increase due to an additional DFI burn. We do indirectly increase the rarity of DFI, however we also decrease the utility of the entire defichain system. It is questionable whether we can increase the price of DFI in this way.
The problem that needs to be solved is to secure the price of dUSD into a larger selling trend. Our current mechanisms like the dUSD burn fee are not suitable for this. I point here to the current reddit thread by Andreas_me: https://www.reddit.com/r/defiblockchain/comments/uatcr7/recent_changes_in_the_dtoken_mint_mechanism/
How does this DFIP benefit the DeFiChain community?
Competitive transaction fee
Higher liquidity mining rewards by increasing commission through higher trading volume
More stable prices through more effective arbitrage trading
Return to simpler / clearer transaction fees
If the situation changes it is possible to reactivate the burn fee at any time with a new DFIP. All required techniques remain implemented.
Non-obligation
I understand that vote of confidence for DFIP carries no obligations by any developers to implement the proposals. DeFiChain is a community projects. Pull requests can be submitted by community and reserved to be evaluated for safety and general community acceptance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: