Why wouldn’t I? There will be an Exodus of liquidity leaving the plenty farms to chase other rewards. The plenty price is going to tank as a result. I can’t keep holding these bags with no additional incentive. It would be in my best interest to bail.
4 Likes
An adjustment to the proposal for me would to be to increase the xPlenty share to at least even with the top percent of 13.5, maybe even higher than that since that will be the only major use case for plenty and incentive. Don’t reduce to 20, do 25 instead to accommodate this.
Once more plenty use cases have released and the liquidity moves up, we can revisit the percentages of the rewards and the overall minting.
3 Likes
I think it’s fair to say that most of us didn’t get into Defi for governance.
If plenty is reduced to a one-dimensional instrument (and a not-so-common one) it will almost certainly tank.
Honestly Bernd the fact this proposal is even up speaks volumes to the lack of concern for your investors and early supporters. This is not how you build a strong community. I hope you’ll change your mind.
If this passes we’ll all be on our way to rektville.
11 Likes
+1
xplenty should have good rewards. Should be in the top 5 in regards to rewards.
2 Likes
11 plenty/token pools are closing and being replaced by ctez/token pools.
why???
you could half the rewards for those 11 plenty/token pools and use the remaining half plenty/block for the new ctez/token pools. i would be perfectly fine with this.
but killing most plenty/token pools? why???
1 Like
I think there’s a good chance its not this team’s strong suit as in they are engineers (maybe too idealistic) and they need help on that front.
1 Like
To help out Plenty holders who will suffer IL on the old pools, I would suggest adding a minimum withdrawal fee to the new pools to increase plenty price and lock in liquidity long term.
I agree.
I know rewriting code from EVM to Tezos isn’t easy and can understand the delays. If we reduce plenty to just governance it will not last. I know there are several ideas for plenty use cases on the roadmap and look forward to those rolling out and succeeding.
With these changes plenty will be reduced to only governance for how long? The only way this won’t tank is if we tie feature requests and rollouts to the governance and build it out organically where the community gets a say in what the utility will be. I know it’s hard to tell what can be built, and how difficult it will be to build it, but holders will need more marketing direction and be involved in that process if we reduce plenty to just governance right now.
1 Like
ctez is a great concept, Plenty is only lacking a xtz route.
ctez allows liquidity providers to control the staking rewards. and they don’t have the mess with malicious bakers that steal the pool rewards, or pools that don’t earn staking at all…
Edit: Agree on marketing.
Bringing new liquidity is exactly what we are trying to do with ctez!
A farm for wUSDC-ctez can attract a lot of liquidity for example. Same goes for all the farms on the list. Providing liquidity in wWBTC - ctez or wWETH - ctez makes a lot more sense for LP’s than adding liquidity into an equivalent PLENTY pair.
Then you can’t vote though 
There is a huge barrier entry to start building on tezos from an engineering perspective and it will require a lot of resources and time (I’m a software eng myself) and I assume we all have busy lives and jobs, the matter of fact is even tho plenty is an open protocol its pretty unlikely anyone other than the plenty team will actually push code and I don’t think xplenty gives us the right to tell this team what to work on which is completely fine.
Most likely scenario is we vote yes/no on a proposal that this team makes.
1 Like
I am totally with you. We need the ctez pairs. But we don’t have to kill the plenty pairs for it. that’s why i suggested to half the plenty pool rewards and use the free rewards for the new ctez farms.
3 Likes
Didnt you ran this experiment already? I don’t recall a wave of liquidity pouring in correct me if I’m wrong.
we should follow one strategy and see that through.
Either incentivize Plenty holders through high reward Plenty pools or earn high xPLENTY APR through (hopefully) high trading volume.
if you split liquidity between unnecessary trading pairs it will be a bad experience for traders and kill volume, in my opinion
I respect your opinion. You used the word unnecessary trading pairs. Explain me which trading pairs are necessary and which not. we have a router anyway.
(I say the only necessary trading pair is XTZ-ctez atm. but that’s a little bit off topic.)
I can’t vote with my liquidity.
1 Like
Completely tone deaf. Decimate everybody with IL then switch all the farms to the ctez that nobody asked for in the first place. Wild to see Bernd take community feedback then move in the exact opposite direction.
What happened to the rewards that were allocated to the “ctez extravaganza”? I didn’t see any rate increases elsewhere when that ended.
4 Likes
I actually agree with you on all that. I’m just thinking out loud on ways that could make this proposal palatable. The adjustments I talked about in a previous post would make this more acceptable for me. But this can’t become only a governance token or I don’t see it truly going anywhere.
We’ll need to market more what the team is working on and more feedback on direction that actually gives governance more meaning because we don’t know how long this could last and everyone is aware of crypto investors lack of attention spans to chase the next pump and high APR.
Really the tez on ramp is needed more than anything at the moment and hope the flat curve LP and router for it is coming soon.
1 Like
They seem to be hellbent on this ctez experiment and I don’t think we can stop it.