Thank you @Fernando and team for being candid and steadfast with the gauges issues.
Given the options available,
DeFiance Capital believe that option 1 is the one that is more inline with the Balancer community at large.
~~
In the short term:
-
The simpler veBal voting model will make it easier for projects to bid for their liquidity pool. Perhaps the free market is the best way to allocate resources.
-
We have seen in curve wars that any inefficiencies is quickly resolved by “voting derivative dapps” like Convex and Redacted. We believe that this will repeat for Balancer and new voting dapps will be deployed in the short run. ( We know as a fact that Maki’s Aura finance will be deploying soon) - [Proposal] Allowlist Aura Finance in Balancer VotingEscrow
-
In other cases, projects that are keen to compete in veBal wars can still win by adopting strategies like token swap as seen by Aave’s proposal
Snapshot -
One contentious issue is Poly/ Arbi deployments will be disadvantaged as voting can only be done on ETH L1. Again, as of the previous point, we feel that “voting dapps” will enter the fray and better allocate resources.
-
At the same time, the crypto space have matured to the stage where there are production level solutions to cross-chain signalling. Our portcos like Dodo, LayerZero, InsurAce have cross-chain solutions built for similar use cases - we will be providing these introductions to Balancer.
~~
For longer term, strategic initiatives:
- Ad-hoc LM programs could be approved and funded by the ecosystem fund. This approach is supported by the Balancer core team.
~~
TL:DR We will be voting for option 1.
Eugin - DeFiance Capital.