[FIP - 195] Move Locks Back to 3 Years for 3x Boost

Governance Proposals Gauges
1

Author

Nader Ghazvini

Summary

This proposal aims to move the maximum lock time for all new gauges back to three years for a 3x boost on the Frax Finance protocol.

Background and Motivations

Currently, Frax Finance offers users the option to lock their tokens for one year in exchange for a 2x boost. However, this option has not proven more effective than the previous option of locking tokens for three years for a 3x boost. Therefore, we propose to move the lock option back to three years for a 3x boost. This change will only apply to FRAXOHM, clevUSD, msUSD, and future gauges, and the gauges deployed with a maximum one-year lock and 2x boost won’t be unlocked or redeployed.

By moving the lock option back to three years, we hope to achieve the following goals:

  • Encourage users to lock their tokens for a longer period, resulting in increased liquidity, trading volumes, protocol stability, and anti-reflexivity in the stablecoin peg.
  • Provide users with a more attractive incentive to lock their tokens, improving the platform’s overall performance.
  • Increase user participation and engagement on the platform by giving them more flexibility and control over their tokens.

Vote

  • For: Move the maximum lock time for all new gauges back to three years for a 3x boost on the Frax Finance protocol.
  • Against: Do nothing
2 Likes
2

Doesn’t this somewhat go against this proposal [FIP - 188] Increase CR to 100% - #3 by FraxGod.eth?

Even before launch, it was clear that relying on FXS to back the algorithmic portion of FRAX required locked liquidity to ensure smooth functioning of the protocol. Unfortunately, we have now seen many projects that didn’t understand this and failed. The downside of locked liquidity is that the protocol pays for it in the form of FXS rewards.

3

Sorry, I don’t see your point here. Could you please elaborate on how this proposal is against FIP-188?

4

This proposal is up for voting here: Snapshot

5

I’m referring to the rationale,

FIP-188 talks about moving to 100% CR ratio implies frax no longer needs to worry about ensuring liquidity is locked, and therefore it can reduce its FXS spent on incentivizing such liquidity.

If this is the goal, isn’t it kinda rough to try increase lock periods?