[FIP - 175] Implement FRAX/mUSD pool ragequit function

Governance Proposals Gauges
1

Author:

WhiteWidow

Proposal

I propose the implementation of a ragequit function, similar to [FIP-123], to address the needs of community members who wish to re-allocate their capital. This ragequit function would provide community members with more flexibility and freedom in managing their capital, while also ensuring that the underlying protocol is not effected with significant risk and also makes a profit if this proposal passes.

As pointed out by the community members, the FRAX/mUSD liquidity pool has seen minimal adoption with FRAX transaction volume since existence, making it an ineffective and non-productive way to direct capital towards.

The proposed solution is a ragequit function that would allow community members to exit their positions in the FRAX/mUSD liquidity pool with a 10% slash.

Additional information

It is worth mentioning that the mStable project is facing challenges such as difficulty in raising capital, limited funds, and market strategy issues, additionally, the project has stopped directing any MTA rewards to this pool.

Vote

  • For: implement ragequit function for FRAX/mUSD gauge (10% fee)
  • Against: Do Nothing
2

Thanks for posting this proposal,
MTA development appears to be dwindling down where their governance token facing huge dumps, despite removing the rewards from this pool on frax finance. Developers are not implementing anything new and paying themselves other then paying themselves salary. They delisted mstable from coinbase last year June, and the whole project appears to be on its last legs. Its concerning and anxiety inducing for people that are on this pool to not be sure whether it will survive until the pool unlocked or not…

1 Like
3

I concur with this proposal. The uncertainty of it’s viability is in doubt. I would like to redeploy my assets back on FRAX. The delisting in very concerning. The market has lost faith in the protocol. a 10% fee is acceptable. They clearly are not supportive of their own assets. Check out there mUSD activity it is almost non existent. mStable - mUSD Daily

1 Like
4

This proposal is up for voting here: Snapshot

5

The temple/frax ragequit included a 20% slash, why should the frax/musd depositors only pay a 10% slash fee?

6

Average lock time is overall shorter, and mUSD is considerably less risky compared to Temple.

7

I see the proposal did not pass. Your argument that mUSD is not an active project + shorter lock time + less risk makes sense, but I am worried about the precedent it sets for future projects that may want to enable ragequit for their pools.

I think the best way to move forward is for the Frax community to create a set of benchmarks/requirements for pools to enable ragequit and different slash percentages based on various conditions within the pool (risk level, lock length, project activity, pool size, etc.) Otherwise i think most ragequit related proposals are unlikely to pass as the question around slash percentage will have to be re-litigated every time.