Sundae Yield Farming v2 parameters update has launched successfully and is in full swing. With ADA-SUNDAE receiving 58.95% of the vote,ADA-SHEN receiving 16.90% of the vote and ADA-WMT receiving 14.47% of the vote.
This has resulted in only delegation with more than 15% is eligible for rewards and makes it hard for a 3rd pool outside of ADA-SUNDAE to be eligible as ADA-SUNDAE will have more tendency to vote for its own pool.
We propose a few possible changes to the settings of the yield farming program, to be enacted 3 business days after the conclusion of this vote, which will allow other pools to begin earning rewards, encourage ADA-SUNDAE holders to vote outside of own pool and attract liquidity to the DEX as the program is intended to do.
We considered and discussed many options with the community, and filtered it down to a few popular options below:
- Vote No Change to make no change to the current operation of the program
- Vote Give SUNDAE/ADA special status to give the ADA/SUNDAE pool (pool 08) special status. Giving ADA/SUNDAE(pool 8) a fixed 30% allocation irregardless of the delegation and consider any ADA/SUNDAE(any pool) delegation as abstained and still serve a purpose of diluting other pools voters. Remaining 70% emission to be distributed to 80th percentile excluding ADA-SUNDAE pools.
- Vote Cap distribution per pool to 14% of emission to thereby allow for minimum of 5 pools while preventing a single pool from draining the emission for own benefit rather than protocol good with remaining unused emission going back to the Treasury.
- Vote Adopt Both to adopt options 2 and 3 simultaneously.
Please indicate below whether you would like to see an on-chain vote for this proposal. Per the governance procedures, once we receive 20 “Interested” votes, we will create the on-chain proposal for voting
- Yes, Interested proceed to onchain vote
Not in favor, personally, of the caps. Will hurt larger pools disproportionally.
Special status for sundae + having votes be on all else is an interesting take.
Need to increase the percentile IMO cause 80% cutoff is too small. Not a big fan of the current algorithm but it shoud be bumped to >90%
I support. #4 to adopt both 3, and 4. Sundae//Ada pool; almost at this point serves no purpose other than price stability through deep liquidity. Where as other pools will increase TVL and tx volumes. We’ve already noticed a huge influx of tvl to the dex through the incentivization of other pools. If sundae/ada holders are looking to increase the health of the protocol; incentives to more pools will be the next step.
I’m in favor of 2, but I think that capping pool distribution to 14% is a bit too much. If any cap were to be implemented, I’d say don’t allow any single pool to receive more emissions than the SUNDAE/ADA pool.
Also, given that options 2 and 3 are independent, I’d suggest breaking them up into two separate proposals. That way wouldn’t be splitting up voters based on which specific implementation they think is best. Otherwise, it’s possible to end up with a scenario where the majority opinion on an issue gets voted out.
Im likely in agreement that both 2 and 3 would be beneficial changes to the protocol but I’m weary of radical changes tbh, let alone two at a time. The effect of one could be dramatic enough and Id prefer to start with one and vote on the other separately.
It makes sense that the ADA/Sundae pool have the most liquidity and community support. It’s the governance token of the protocol and necessary for everything in V2. On the other hand, no single pool should have the ability to dominate rewards allocations to the point that users are disincentivized from providing liquidity anywhere else.
I would be in favor of 2 but maybe start the upper cap at 40%-50% just to test out the change and gather some data. It shouldn’t be a rule that only applies to ADA/Sundae though. The rule and proposal would be better directed at delegation saturation of any pool.