Hello everyone, thank you for your feedback.
I understand your frustration about such modifications but need to make two things very clear (I’m speaking as an individual):
- We value our partnership a lot with APWine a lot and wish to keep building with them, but it is not a critical part of the success of our pool. The integration represents less than 5% of our palstkAave, even with the high APY. This might change with PAL LM, so I agree that we have to try it out.
- All members who have commented here are APW bagholders. This is not a problem, but it is important to understand that there is bias. As a DAO, we don’t enable LM to reward user but to attract activity. As such, we have to take this as the only metric of success. Holder satisfaction is not a metric to take into account.
Our position as a team is that 20,000 PAL is overkill for the current size of the pool. Dividing by two might be a bit aggressive but when taking into account the APW APY, the pool provides double digit yield and yet, hasn’t grown for a while. So let’s test it out. My offer is to start at 15K a month for 2 weeks and come back on the state of the pool. If it represent under 10% of palStkAave, we will decrease to 10K.
As for the token swap, I have been against them until now, but am keen on exploring them for yield bearing governance tokens. However, if we were to do one, it would allow us to boost our APW pools, hence, not needing PAL LM anymore. I think we should build a proposal for next month.
If all commenters like this message we will proceed with the vote tonight.