Simple yet brilliant. Winner!
so many great ideas here, can’t wait for the community fund to be up and running 
and amazing to see community activity picking up! 2021 about to get wild hehe
I really like your idea. But this sounds like a complete new project and very difficult for a community funded project.
I just read up about Balancer V2. If I understand it correctly they do something similar but only for ERC20 assets.
So maybe we could collaborate with Balancer and would get a multi asset multi chain liquidity pool.
2 Likes
I would love to see a way for RenBridge users to be able to buy gas on the destination chain as part of the minting process. For an example of what I am talking about check out the Binance bridge. Users can very easily add on BNB when they mint so the destination wallet is immediately usable. This will help remove barriers to entry for users moving to new chains they might not be as experienced with.
There are some great ideas in this thread, we are going to have our work cut out for us making all this come to life. LFG fRens!
9 Likes
Hey fRENs, In order to help Ren bootstrap more assets to BSC, I took it upon myself to start a 1ich x RenDOGE pool. I seeded it with 4K. I was wondering if anyone would like to help get it earning?
My plan is to onboard doge users and teach them how to access defi through RenVM. I spoke to over 100 Doge people today and many have no idea what defi is or how to use it.
Would love some feed back. Would love even more if anyone wants to help.
8 Likes
Renvm cross chain flash loan pool. In the future we plan to have many chains with many different ren tokens. If we create a flash loan pool that sits on RENVM which the community fund could help to provide liquidity for. this pool could be accessed by any chain this would help with providing liquidity for protocols that can utilise flash loan pools.
Inspiration came from this article:
10 Likes
The RenVM wallet would make for a great dAPP idea that the DN community could fund and support.
2 Likes
We should be using some of the fund to reward liquidity providers and new dapps that are built using renassets .
2 Likes
I would like to see the fund used to for two main things: 1) To grow demand for renBTC 2) To improve REN ecosystem tooling and UX
renBTC Demand
- Incentivizing influencers to review the REN ecosystem and its potential
- Incentivizing platforms to offer renBTC liquidity, staking and lending facilities
- Building comprehensive, easy-to-follow user guides
REN Ecosystem tools
- Build out command center functionality to include tools for gas optimization, private withdrawals, automated liquidity provision to platforms, etc.
- Finance the compute and web presence for a fund-owned REN staking pool that runs darknodes for small-balance REN holders and further subsidizes the community fund
- Integrate more privacy features into the RenVM
6 Likes
Just reposting this idea to the brainstorm space.
Great option for the community fund to bootstrap liquidity in new pools/chains, solve the chicken and egg problem that liquidity can have in new ecosystems, and foster faster adoption of ren assets.
2 Likes
Crosschain swaps leveraging on the benefits of 0Conf and Rook hiding books.
This idea could potentially compete with Rune.
0Conf is focused Right now in BTC/ETH. What about to leverage in Rook hiding books in combination of 0Confirmation, which uses already RenVM. Rook is really a cool idea but is limited to gasless swapping ERC tokens. 0Confirmation could allow fast transactions between BTC (less than 2 min) and any ERC token in the future (currently focus on BTC/DAI)
3 Likes
Lot’s of good idea in here.
- Funds for renVM hackathons
- After a target amount of funds are held in the community fund, excess funds can be used to build a yield bearing savings. Something like yearn USDC pool.
Loving this idea 100%
Building on the current (and significant) interest in DOGE, a proposal has very recently been put forward on Bancor to whitelist and provide liquidity mining (“LM”) rewards for renDOGE (Proposal: Whitelist renDOGE 150k BNT Co-Investment and LM Rewards - Whitelisting - Bancor Governance Forum). While the outcome of this proposal is not yet known, it is clear that the Bancor team is keen to build on the REN-Bancor relationship - see, for example, MBR’s (Mark Richardson, Bancor Consultant) response to the proposal, in which he states his “hope this is the first of a series of proposals surrounding the REN ecosystem”. Similar sentiments have been expressed in the BNT telegram threads.
As far as I can tell, the renDOGE proposal has been put forward by a member of the DOGE community. In my view, it should be the REN community that is driving these sorts of proposals forward, rather than relying on the proactivity of others.
To put forward Bancor proposals, we would require 25k vBNT, which we could either: (i) purchase; or (ii) obtain by purchasing and staking 25k BNT (Bancor Network Token) on Bancor. I think we should be aiming for option (ii), as this would have the secondary (and significant) benefit of generating yield (in BNT LM rewards) for the Community Fund.
With the power to generate Bancor proposals, we’d have the opportunity to vote through whitelisting of nascent renAssets on Bancor (which would see liquidity providers protected from impermanent loss and able to earn swap fees) and, perhaps, the allocation of LM rewards. This would represent a significant incentive for individuals to mint these renAssets and add them to the relevant Bancor liquidity pools. We could also look to reinstate LM rewards for the existing renBTC/BNT and REN/BNT liquidity pools.
This is an approach that could equally be rolled out for, e.g., Rari - we could accumulate a significant proportion of RGT (Rari Governance Token) in order to be able to influence Rari governance decisions.
5 Likes
I am in favor of governance capture. I do think there’s some things to consider though:
-
Approach: how much governance should we capture?
A simple vote initiation isn’t much. So to me it seems a protocol like bancor would demand a huge amount of capital purchased at full price for a small percentage of say. -
Trust: how sure are we that the governance token controls the protocol?
In most cases governance tokens are primarily profit shares and secondarily governance control. At the end of the day these governance tokens don’t get much say, and id argue its important to get into the ones that specifically do, even if that just means a team who actually wants input. Not sure if this applies to bancor specifically. -
Discount/seed round/early investor:
similar to point 1, this point focuses on the idea that almost every protocol has tokens set aside for VC and seed rounds. My opinion would be to focus on these. Maybe an established protocol like bancor would still give us this, but I see it as less likely as they’re established and connected. -
Protocol built fairly: I have concerns about many technologies from the pre-smart contract finance world. I do think bancor incorporates some of these concepts and I am critical of this approach. A system that relies on 0.00000001% chance of 100% failure is in my eyes destined to need a bailout (read: fail) eventually. The question is, where does the money come from? Every one of these farming or AMM or aggregator protocols can shift around who pays for what where, but at the end of the day, in bancors model it appears the investor holds the IL risk, albeit small chance of happening and 100% chance of losing everything if it does, minus what insurance pays them back.
Things i personally would avoid:
A. Withdraw/deposit fees on yield aggregators
B. Insurance schemes or protocols relying on insurance
C. Overly connected networks such as how CRV gives YFI vaults but blocks every other yield aggregator. Who doesnt want more volume? Seems fishy on CRVs part.
D. Overly single party owned networks, such as maker or CRV. This one though i could be easily swayed on as at some point its highly subjective.
E. overly established protocols, such as I don’t want to buy Amazon shares as I feel like wed be buying “bags” for a very low percentage, versus some deals I’ve seen like harvest buying 10% of perp protocol at 20% discount off ICO price, which then did a 10x; these are the governance captures id get excited about personally.
some valid points in this post imo, I’m in favor of initiatives like this
-
I believe @TooOrangey was mainly referring to enough governance to get the proposals up and be able to support pools with some liquidity.
-
Could be true but feels like overanalyzing imo, at the end of the day what @TooOrangey put forth was quite straight forward in the sense that purpose is to push proposals and allow for wider community to vote, I dont see the need to go full on game theory about how we can influence governance.
3/4. Again feels like deep analysis that will be contaminated with personal bias. I’m sure there is a wide array of opinions about different protocols. Might be easier if we focus on trying to get first foot in and let the market decide the outcome. Getting proposals up and providing liquidity is a good start, if the same is done with many protocols eventually some of them will pick up.
The ren team has demonstrated this quite well by pushing for integrations and pools while market seemed to not be interested, but eventually interest picked up and we start to see volumes generated. Like BSC recently.
I personally have many opinions about the market as whole but feel it’s important I keep that to myself and allow ren community to remain neutral with the drive to push liquidity to the whole ecosystem. We could see quite wild arguments if we start involving personal bias into governance.
1 Like
-
Great idea on the dev volume bounties!
-
The rari pool could definitely be seeded with this although pretty disappointing nobody from the REN team has done so (assuming they have made serious $ from the Alameda deal) or even Alameda could seed it.
I believe that there are new criteria for new coins/chains to be integrated, including a commitment from the project to subsidize a liquidity mining programme worth at least $50k.
However I wonder if this was in place when REN decided to work on renTerra? renDGB? renDOGE? These new assets desperately need liquidity mining programmes on both the ETH and BSC chains.
Idea by @davidbrent101 from Ren TG:
Do you have plans to allow me to convert from BTC directly into ZEC, ETH etc, without the need to do multiple transactions? I.e. Can I do a mint and burn in one transaction soon via the UI? For example:
- BTC → RENBTC
- RENBTC → RENZEC
- RENZEC → ZEC
Me: Do you (and other guys) think that this is something that can be in demand?
Well I don’t think people using privacy coins HODL them. They want to hold something more stable/secure, and they want to get hold of it without using a CEX. So I definitely think being able to convert into and out of ZEC from BTC/ETH without using a CEX would be very useful.
2 Likes