Turning off the GHST Bonding Curve

Ideas
42

I am against this for sure. Everyone has already made great points I agree with. I will add that creating a large treasury will just create a honey pot for people to come in and cause chaos. This is what brought down RomeDao.

Heres how I could easily see it play out. You create the treasury. Someone will come in and short ghst down to at least treasury value. People will panic and exaggerate the downside as ppl do. Then when everyone is nice and pissed. come into discord and suggest taking the treasury and splitting it between the token holders.

In short it creates a large sum of money for people to fight over. I see no benefit that could not be archived by creating more sinks and having gltr be the token that brings in the speculation. Creating stable yield from alch farming could also bring in more long term holders.

11 Likes
43

Absolutely. I think it’s crucial to denominate RF rewards in GHST and not in USD to prevent exactly what you describe after - assets completely decoupling and staying flat while GHST rapidly appreciates in value. I believe this to be the main risk, by no means do I want to fuck everyone over who has invested deep into the ecosystem instead of simply holding GHST.

I would agree if the GHST market cap wasn’t only $62M…For the Aavegotchi ecosystem it definitely is a lot of money, and I believe people overestimate the actual price support we get through the Curve.

44

Thank you very much @Moon for bringing this up. This issue has been mentioned repeatedly from the very beginning of the project until now even when we have entered the chapter 2 of Gotchiverse, which means we really need to think about this seriously.

In the last 2 years, the Aavegotchi team is definitely one of the most active and vibrate DAO communities I’ve seen, with a Treasury ranking floating between 10 and 40. The DAO proposals and discussions always are at the top, and more eco tools keeps coming out , we shall be grateful for the existing system of the stable revenue. But shall we aim higher with such a good community?

*Eco payment shall be stable？

Are payment tokens necessarily stable? ETH, APE, SAND are all payment tokens, but ultimately the market is willing to accept them. When an ecological token is floating, is it the ecological recognition of its status that users are still willing to use it as a payment target? After all, there are now more and more people regard ETH as the basic coin in portfolio instead of USDT.

*The cancellation of the Bonding Curve is not the result of a pure pursuit of profit, but a desire to take the project to the next level?

In fact, sometimes people criticize the Chinese community will be more interest-seeking, but those who stay now is certainly the right group of people. Our treasury now owns 30 million dollars while our market value is only 60 million dollars, which is too healthy, also too undervalued, Aavegotchi deserves to be seen by more people, we all know how active the community is when we laaunch p2e. If you love the project, you should let more people pay attention to it, and the price, the market value shall be opened up, rather than just making money within its own ecology. We will run out this one day. Although now axie price fell a lot, but still does not affect it is a legend. A good project will survive after the fall.

*** Bonding curve and game development issues**

There are many frens say we should focus more on game development and NFT utility. Canceling the BC does not affect game development . We stay to support Aavegotchi cuz we trust how they would treat the project.

*DAO Treasury management issues deserve careful consideration

If BondingCurve canceled, the treasury funds do need to be treated well and seriously consider how to deal with. (not think that through yet)

No matter how it goes with the final decision. We have been there with Aavegotchi for the long journey and will respect the decision.

非常感谢Moon的提案，这个问题从项目之初到现在我们已经过渡到Gotchiverse第二阶段了还在被反复提及，代表我们真的要好好思考一下这个问题。

在过去的2年中，Aavegotchi团队绝对是我见过最有活力的DAO社区之一，Treasury排名10～40之间浮动，DAO proposal和讨论总是名列前茅，我们Gotchigang也可以看到在稳定系统中，我们衍生出最多的工具和小游戏，我们感恩于现有系统对OG的稳定收益，但是作为生态一部分，如果项目整体的活跃用户和市值在往上10倍，那我们收获的可能更多！

*关于GHST波动带来的生态支付代币问题

支付代币就一定是稳定的吗？如果是的话，那GHST是否是对标另一个DAI呢？ETH，APE，SAND也都是支付代币，但最终市场还是愿意接受，当一个生态代币浮动，用户还愿意以它为支付标的，是否才是表示生态对其地位的认可？毕竟现在都有越多来越多的人以ETH为币本位，而不是USDT。

*取消联合曲线，并不是存粹追求利益的结果，而是希望项目更上一层楼

其实有时候大家会诟病中国社区会更加追求利益，但是现在留下来的肯定是对的一批人，我们treasury现在3000万美金，我们市值才6000万美金，这太健康了，也太被低估了，Aavegotchi值得被更多的人看见，我们都感受到了Play2earn时期社区的活跃度，如果爱项目，应该让更多的人关注到，而价格，市值的提升是引起关注的最快方式，而不是在生态内只管自己赚钱，需要不停内部消化。虽然现在axie价格跌了很多，但依旧不影响它是一个时代，一个传奇，好的项目在跌落神坛之后，依旧会爬起来。

*联合曲线和游戏开发问题

有很多小伙伴说我们更应该关注游戏开发和NFT赋能，取消联合曲线和努力开发游戏是不冲突的，我们留下来支持Aavegotchi的小伙伴都是真爱，都是看好团队，也相信团队会持续为NFT赋能和开发。这两件事情，不是一个相悖的事情。

*DAO Treasury管理问题值得小心对待

如果BondingCurve取消的话，国库的资金的确好好对待，认真考虑如何处理。

9 Likes
45

In my opinion - the offer is not very good - GHOST will become a pump and dump token. By removing the bonding curve, everything will come to this. Volatility will increase, the influence of speculators and market makers on the price will increase. The token will essentially lose the collateral it currently has.

3 Likes
46

I think this is a hugely important consideration, that many readers may have overlooked.

Ironically, the community has been torn and tested over much smaller things -when they feel a single party or entity is extracting more of an advantage from the protocol than others.

Many speak as if the curve is free and flawless- the reality is that MILLIONS flow to a single or handful of curve arbers every single time that our economy and valuations could grow instead. We missed the best parts of the past bull run, for some “stability and safety” that has evaporated either way, as GHST is not far from $1, and NFTs have and keep dumping.

How many RF seasons could we hold with what curve arbers have earned so far? Why does nobody look into who these parties are, how many of them , how much do they extract, and how worth it is it to retain their services?

It may be that the DAO and its participants could achieve much greater capital efficiency buying smarter downside protection such as derivatives, instead of overpaying via the bonding curve and its mysterious oligopoly of arbers we never speak about.

The community is quick to judge involved whales that buy assets, vote, participate- but extractor whales such as those that exploit the curve, raffles and other protocol dynamics in silence- nobody ever questions them.

10 Likes
47

Would you please consider adding a timeframe to that poll to make it moar precise?

3 Likes
48

Who is Wintermute? And who is paying them to arbitrage? Can’t anyone that has KYCed arbitrage the Curve?

6 Likes
49

What would this proposal mean for the Tokenomics of GHST?
If I understand it correctly we now have a potentially infinite supply from the curve. Would there be a finite supply if we got rid of the curve?

50

Curve arbers take risk in running cross-chain arb, and are rewarded for it, just like any other AMM. To date they’ve also paid us 2.5M worth of DAI, which (since you asked) would be enough to fund one season of rarity farming (at current levels).

The term “exploiting” makes it sound like the arb is unintentional, or a hack. When actually it’s a perfectly normal process that happens on every single DEX on every single chain. The arbers are actually providing a valuable service, keeping the spread low on all major exchanges.

I don’t think that’s true. We (the ones informed) all knew the benefits and drawbacks of the bonding curve, but we made the decision to implement it because of the desire to use GHST as a unit of account throughout the ecosystem.

I’d like to say that throughout this process, I will remain unbiased about which way this should go, but I will also work to dispel any myths or mis-represented points that are raised, to help ensure a well-informed conversation!

16 Likes
51

Turn on during bear market, turn off during bull market, kek.

Jokes aside, pretty interesting topic as I never envisioned turning off the bonding curve, but it’s entertaining to listen to the possibilities, maybe it could be seen as a mechanism to safely build out the protocol without seeing too much volatility, where there’s actually a point where the benefit of turning it off offsets the downsides, key question here is when is the ideal time to do so and if the r/r is properly studied there’s probably room for a curveless future

2 Likes
52

I think we’re looking at things backwards. I’ve been thinking about this all day long.

The idea has been tossed around to let alchemica + GLTR be the speculative tokens. To me, this doesn’t make sense. In order to create a stable gaming experience, the in-game currencies ought to be relatively stable.

A true gamer is going to want to know how much in dollars it costs to play X dungeon or compete in Y arena. If one day it costs $0.30 to repair your gear (arbitrary example) and the
If GLTR is rubber banding like crazy, it’s going to be a terrible user experience.

GHST on the other hand is not used in-game for anything. It’s price volatility doesn’t have an impact on the actual gameplay experience.

The Bazaar

One idea we could implement to alleviate a fluctuating GHST price in the wearables market would be to allow buyers to browse in different currencies (stablecoins, GHST, alch). If it’s possible, we could even allow for cross-token purchases. I like the fireball for $200 USDC. I buy it. The seller gets the equivalent in GHST.

3 Likes
53

Just a thought, since I am not an expert on the bonding curve, but would it be possible to deactivate the curve after a certain amount of coins have been minted?

For example, the bonding curve stays in play until X amount of GHST tokens have been minted which is for example when GHST reaches a price of $3. After that, the bonding curve gets turned off, no new GHST will be minted and it just goes into price discorvery mode. You can still sell back to the bonding curve, but just at that $3 price. If on the open market price of GHST is $10, nobody will use the curve. If the price returns to just under $3, the curve would be active again.

This will give the stability of GHST during bear markets or downturns, while also keeping the possibility of speculation and price discovery in play.

3 Likes
54

My concern which has been already stated of aavegotchi wearables and other NFTs dropping in USD terms if GHST losses stability. A minor annoyance, baazar sellers having to monitor and updated prices in GHST cuz of volatility.

I’d like to see baazar prices transition to DAI, which mentially would decouple aavegotchi NFTs value from GHST. Also, prices in DAI are easier to understand for new investors.
Side note, baazar fees in DAI could market buy GHST for RF rewards to help with buy pressure. How the buy back works would need more discussion.

All and all, GHST would become a pure governance token and its volatility would not affect baazar prices. GHST would be used for voting and rarity farming rewards.

Also, with decoupling aavegotchi assets from GHST allows prices to stay stable even if GHST goes to $10 or if goes to $0.10. Either way won’t matter if Baazar is in terms of DAI.

1 Like
55

Would we still be paying in GHST or will it be in DAI?

57

Before curve turned off, Baazar prices would be in DAI.

58

I brought this up awhile ago but very few chimed in :sweat_smile:

3 Likes
59

That’s fair ser! Bad word choice on my part, as I used it on the sense of economic/resource exploitation, and not as you describe, yet still much better terms could have been used.

With my post I meant to simply illustrate that we create an economic benefit or resource for arbers to exploit or extract… or whichever term is best.

Agree 110% with the spirit of this comment… which is exactly why I continue to regret we opened the door long ago to analyzing and judging participants of the ecosystem. We should appreciate people who invest or take risks in the platform without responding with subjective measures based on “fairness to others”. If an arber is sacrosanct for risking their capital in the platform, so should other types of whales and investors, yet that is far from what we’ve seen. On a separate thread, you commented on how monitoring of users and participants happens everywhere all the time whether we like it or not. We track the wallets of our participants, we distinguish between OGs and newcomers, we apply labels such as “scholars” or “extractors”, we nerf strategies, gotchies and wearables if they seem too successful against potential future users or low affordability users- so I ask, why do we not do the same to what apparently is a small band of individuals extracting a fairly substantial chunk of the economic benefits from the platform?

We should be able to review these participants of the ecosystem, and respond with informed choices, as we have already done to every other segment of the ecosystem, from big owners to short term renters.

3 Likes
60
  1. I Choose aavegotchi for its singularity, and its brain. The curve make me feel safe, compared to any ape NFT project which savagely pump x100 and get back to zero.

As governance token I found it fair to be stable. imo and as many other frens said, speculation IS for ALCH and GLTR.

  1. HOWEVER this is a very good thinking exercise, and this choice has to be considered. I agree that this security has a lot of weight and can greatly impact the aavegotchi expansion.

Maybe the solution is to decorelate slightly the ratio between GHST:DAI ? Is that possible ?
If yes, A roadmap Can be determined, based on aavegotchi success. For example :

For gamefi, the main factor of success of the game Is the average daily player online.

Actually the ecosystem is quite fragile because of the current development of the gaming features (like PVP, PVE, wearable crafting, grid exploration…). And more the game will be develop more it will be resiliant from Bears.

Considering the above, we could schedule a xx% of decorelation from the curve, measured for example by the numbers of Lickquidators killed during the Great battle.

Indeed, it would be smart and excusable to include into the Lore the de-curving. Consequently, it will be done progressively and in accordance to the aavegotchi success.

Kind GN

5 Likes
61

I think before doing any modification to the curve, making land sale 3, introducing GHST-collateral gotchis and various major updates like quickly releasing haunt 2 portals right after haunt 1 portals … you first need to have a sizeable playerbase to see the effects on a large scale. Sadly 3000-4000 bots do not count as players/investors.
Normally when the price goes up people usually can’t keep quiet about it and naturally start telling to each other about gotchis, introducing newcomers to it looking for money. Atm I saw we have at max 500 real players with at most 200 attending the calls.

Without using up any money at all we now have Blockscan Chat - Wallet to Wallet Messaging for Web3 to contact whales 1 by 1, but it depends heavily how common sensical you are with the message. At most you use a bot to mass message 20000 whales, but you have to prepare everything accordingly and keep their interest and attention piqued. Say there’s a limited event for 1 week where they guaranteed win something(a subjectively priced NFT that in the future may or may not be incredibly useful like caartridges) so they didn’t waste their time and for that 1 week you try to make them understand the project and invest more in it. And you can do this without everyone looking at a NFT drop as a landmine ready to drain the wallets or using up money to mass airdrop ERC20 and ERC1155. Mass transactions cost money even on Polygon.
Not asking to spam messages every month, at the same time you shouldn’t shy away for 2-3 years till you finally make the perfect message. Just make a good message with a good competition to back it up to keep the whales’ attention while he learns about aavegotchi.

blockscan’s chat is a new thing that atm hasn’t been abused as much as random Polygon and BSC airdrops that 100% were always wallet drainers. Unless Penske and other whales could correct me on that on how blockscan’s chat has been used so far.

But you know the real reason back in April 2021 when the dog tokens crashed and GHST gave no fucks? Our tiny community that’s insulated from everything else and thus nobody had bots set up to auto sell GHST, NFTs or sell everything when Shiba Inu crashed because Vitalik Buterin sent his tokens to India. We had such a small community and a project insulated from everything that it didn’t care about that sudden crash.

I found the curve useful for being able to sell in 1-7 days without waking up to a -50% in 1 day like with Matic that went from 1$ to 0.40$ back to 1$ then back to 0.70$ in 24 hour periods or even 1 candles.
I personally found the curve not as resistant. GHST-USDC was a great STABLE long-term stake that gave me 70% during off-season raffles and 144% during wearable raffles. So I could make 2x off my tickets if I waited for the raffles.

62

If turning off the bonding curve is coming, who would bother spending GHST for the next land sale?

The smart play would be to hold onto GHST and dump your Aavegotchi NFTs on the market, wait for the GHST token burns from the DAI from the bonding curve then cash out of GHST.

The value of the Aavegotchi NFTs would be shot given you are going to be constantly dealing with volatility and GHST is more liquid than the NFTs.

12 Likes