The Graph has been making extensive modifications which meant that modifying any new graphs would required a big overhaul or they would not sync anymore on their infrastructure. This was connected to them pushing development of a new, more decentralized version of the graph.
Indexing the Centrifuge graph now takes > 2 weeks but at this point. This means any change can only be fully tested and verified after a two week delay. In addition the graph has very poor testing infrastructure which we would have to build mostly from scratch. So completely overhauling the rewards infrastructure is probably not worth it given the migration to Centrifuge Pools which would make all of this obsolete.
Given the lack of clarity of what some of the poll options meant and how to implement these I think the poll itself should not be used for a direct council motion but instead based on the feedback @thespaceacatjr you could create another set of polls that more clearly suggest how to adjust parameters that the community can vote as a next step?
I would be in big favor of implementing EUROC stable coin in the Tinlake Pools and RWAMarket pool. @ImdioR perhaps start a poll on this? As most investors are from Europe I guess their concern of a currently very strong USD is on top of their list. I’m also curious what the Centrifuge team thinks about implementing EUROC. @lucasvo Something you consider?
Let’s try to keep this on topic. I think the discussion of a EURC makes a lot of sense - a separate thread would be a good idea if there is a desire to discuss this further.
Thanks everyone for the high level of engagement and participation.
Looks like we will make no change to the reward structure immediately, but I suspect new proposals will continue to come regarding this subject (including from myself!).
In terms of the team investigating duration based rewards I understand the community would like to see some progress there, but we need to be cognizant of the teams development compacity and schedule. I am sure they will investigate this when appropriate and the community can follow up with more detailed proposals of how that might look once more resource is free.
Thanks everyone for the feedback. The feedback on rewards has been helpful and we are looking to implement the proposed changes as soon as possible. I would like to give some context on what is technically feasible on Tinlake and what changes have to wait until pools go live on Centrifuge chain.
We are currently towards the end of a year long development period of building Pools for Centrifuge Chain which is replacing what Tinlake is doing today. Because we are close to finishing it (it’s already live on Altair!) we want to reduce any new development of features on Tinlake to an absolute minimum: any development work we do on Tinlake could delay the launch of Pools and is work done twice as we need to build the same functionality again on our chain.
Therefore the only viable option for changing rewards on Tinlake is to stay within the system we already have to day and only change parameters we already have today. From what is originally proposed in this we can do the following:
We can set the DROP & TIN reward rate to the same number
We can set AO rewards to 0
Making rewards dependent on TVL (i.e. reward rate = global rewards / TVL) can not be implemented but the community could simply decide to vote on more frequent changes in the reward rate whenever TVL changes significantly.
Incentives for investing longer in a pool unfortunately definitely go beyond the scope so I would say this will have to wait until rewards are implemented on Centrifuge chain.
