Is incentive analysis for Agoric BLD planned after the change in direction and tokenomics for BLD?
I remember Zooko and Brian were involved in early Ethereum incentive analysis with the Least Authority. @dckc @dtribble @markm . Such analysis maybe needed to bring BLD as the main store of value and means of payment/transfer in future.
Hello,
I had made a proposal for the new tokenomics of $BLD, I took into account the $IST, but we can simply remove it if the community is in favor of abandoning the IST.
My first idea was to integrate the fee switch, i.e. the fees would be redistributed to the stakers. This would reward those who believe in it by staking their $BLD and also contribute to network security.
I know that other projects like Jupiter use Buybacks.
Fees are used to buy JUPs and lock them for 3 years.
Aave has been doing the same since recently, I think.
Your idea of “copying” ETH isn’t bad, but it was based on POW, unlike $BLD which is POS.
The fee switch is, in my opinion, the best strategy for everyone, but don’t forget that Agoric also has to pay itself with fees, which is totally normal.
A kind of dividend
Chain abstraction, orchestration and fee switch could be the next trends in storytelling. I’m seeing it more and more on social networks. Agoric could play on all three fronts
While the idea of a decentralized stablecoin like $IST is admirable in theory, in practice, it introduces unnecessary systemic risk to the Agoric ecosystem, especially when it’s pegged to volatile crypto collateral. We’ve seen what happens when these systems fail: depegging, capital flight, and total erosion of credibility, as in the case of Terra Luna. It’s not a question of “if” it happens, but “when” unless the system is absolutely bulletproof, which no crypto-backed stablecoin has proven to be at scale.
Ethereum itself proving how staking incentives can power a network without relying on native stablecoins.
Abandoning IST is not a step backward. It’s a step toward reducing attack surfaces, simplifying the protocol, and refocusing on $BLD’s core value proposition: securing the network and benefiting from its growth.
Let’s cut the risk before it becomes a liability and put our full weight behind BLD.
Agoric has itself 120 million BLD and can stake them and get rewards from fees.
Thanks for the thread. WRT IST, it was planned to provide fees back to BLD, and earned appropriate fees on it’s use. So “fee switch” has always been a thing, though regulatory considerations have often hampered it. However, it did not get enough growth to where the fees would be meaningful.
Additional mechanisms that tie progress to BLD are certainly worthy of consideration; one needs to be careful where one adds fee structures in systems. It’s often better to get the system up, and then judiciously add them.
Hence moving to using BLD directly is the first step: contracts on Agoric will pay in BLD to execute, to use orchestration services, create accounts, etc. That’s the core that I would like to see ASAP. “BLD powers Orchestration!” 
The best way to wake up BLD is token’s buyback.
It’s a good idea to sell a portion of tokens, let’s say 100 million BLD to Circle in private invest round with price $0.4 and after start making buyback from the open market with current prices. Of course, if You have enough money from ICO You can miss this step with new invest round, I guess 
.
It will be enough to buy a few million BLD only to skyrocket the price, on my opinion.
By doing this You will help Electric Coin Company a lot with their debt. And all retail investors will be happy.
I fully agree to your idea, Dean. I hope to see the changes and plans ASAP.
No, not really. That just sounds like a rescue plan to save the bagholders for the short term.
Are You expert in this case to be so confident what is right and what is wrong?
I see You very support Agoric company in their efforts to destroy what they built during last years.
But again why do You think they were wrong and now they are right?
The idea of dual tokens was from the very beginning. Agoric criticized Ethereum for the ETH role as gas token. Pay gas fees in stable token was the main reason of creation IST.
Agoric’s dual-token model with IST was a unique approach, especially in contrast to Ethereum’s gas model. But, in the end, it failed. Moreover, Ethereum has since evolved with ETH 2.0 and proof-of-stake, which address some of the issues Agoric initially highlighted.
The blockchain space is rapidly changing, and flexibility in adapting to these shifts is essential for long-term success. What is most important for the institutional investors and retail investor is securing the value of BLD. Period.
You can try to enhance value of BLD starting using IST as gas fee token, how it was planned from the very beginning.
Stable gas fees can be Agoric’s advantage in crypto space.
IST rewards for BLD stakers can be advantage to hold BLD more.
Higher demand for BLD ( everyone wants to get rewards in IST from FAST USDC and other orchestration future dapps) makes higher BLD price and this makes chain more secure.
More sucure chain becomes more attractive foe new dapps. And new dapps bring new IST fees for BLD holders.
I’ll be back in few years to check on the progress. Honestly, it’s frustrating to see so many people unable to grasp the fundamental issues that are holding the project back.
There seems to be few ill-informed people who are against to the necessary changes, and it’s clear that without addressing these core problems, it will be difficult for Agoric to move forward. I really hope that by then, the team and community will have come to terms with these challenges and made the tough decisions needed to get things on track.
You didn’t answer, just general frases.
You didn’t answer why don’t use IST in order to increase BLD value, because you have no arguments, man.
Agoric will do what it wants to do and will change what it wants to change.
It has majority of votes together with DCF and venture capital.
We here don’t pretend to change something just share our thoughts.