On behalf of the Balancer community, I’d like to propose the following modifications to the token whitelist used for BAL governance distribution. As a reminder, these whitelist proposals are now pre-approved on objective technical criteria only, so they are not subject to community vote. All new tokens will be placed at cap1 for liquidity mining, meaning each token’s measured BAL-eligible liquidity is scaled to a maximum of $1M (at time of writing). At any time, community members may propose to increase a token’s cap to the next tier. For reference, please see the previous proposals which detail the motivation for creation of the whitelist and define the list of tokens used to date. Links are included at the end of this post.
Proposed Modifications
I would like to propose adding the following new tokens to the whitelist:
ADD KP3R 0x1cEB5cB57C4D4E2b2433641b95Dd330A33185A44
ADD POLS 0x83e6f1E41cdd28eAcEB20Cb649155049Fac3D5Aa
ADD pxUSD_MAR2021 0xf93340b1a3aDf7eedcAEc25Fae8171D4b736e89F
The proposed changes will go into effect at 00:00 UTC on Monday, November 2. Pools containing whitelisted tokens will begin to accrue BAL rewards beginning at 00:00 UTC on Monday; but they may not appear on the Balancer pools UI with symbol/logo until a bit later in the week, most likely Tuesday or Wednesday. Please be patient. Furthermore, whitelisted tokens will not be added to the Balancer exchange UI; the core team adds tokens to the official exchange UI at their own discretion and considers a variety of factors. Tokens can always be traded using contract addresses in place of symbols, and anyone is free to fork the open source exchange UI to add more symbols.
Resulting Soft/Hard Pegs
The following price pegs will be added to the BAL mining scripts in response to the whitelist changes. At time of writing, soft pegs receive a wrapFactor of 0.2 and hard pegs receive a wrapFactor of 0.1.
SOFT pxUSD_MAR2021 <-> USD group
Omissions
Some requested tokens were omitted this week.
The following token has non-standard transfer() and transferFrom() functions and will not reliably “transfer N tokens from one address to another.” As such, it is in violation of Whitelist Criterion #3: The token’s transfer() and transferFrom() implementations must exhibit the expected behavior - namely, transferring N tokens from one address to another. Certain divergences from this behavior, such as transfer fees, can cause issues with Balancer pools, and these tokens will be rejected.
BAD TRANSFER AXIAv3 0x793786e2dd4Cc492ed366a94B88a3Ff9ba5E7546
The following tokens lack price feeds through the CoinGecko API, which violates Whitelist Criterion #7: The token must have a price feed accessible via CoinGecko’s API. This is instrumental to calculating a pool’s eligibility for BAL rewards.
NO PRICE FEED ANT 0xa117000000f279D81A1D3cc75430fAA017FA5A2e
NO PRICE FEED wLOKI 0x5ff668ddfDcBB7505f41ED56e626E4D4719DcB26
Reference: Prior Proposals
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/proposing-the-token-whitelist-for-bal-distribution
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-2
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-3
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-4
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-5
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-6
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-7
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-8
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/proposal-to-update-the-whitelist-process
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-9
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-10
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-11
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-12
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-13
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-14
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-15
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-16
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-17
https://forum.balancer.fi/t/bal-whitelist-round-18