Fair enough, we can do that.
That would defeat the purpose unfortunately. If we ever have as many pairs as Uniswap it simply won’t be an option to let users claim over 100 different token types in one transaction and also a UI nightmare
1 Like
Do it ! This is a great way to grow baln.
I Agree with this.100%
I like it but is there a reason to convert a first class ecosystem citizen like sICX.
I feel sICX should be kept as-is.
1 Like
Even though I am 100% for this proposal, I agree with Vasque as well.
Besides, an ongoing vote offers great ‘excuse’ to inform the broader community of what is going on with Balanced and how it is making progress.
2 Likes
Further, we mustn’t dismiss the current positive effect that the Network fees column has on users:
-
Like nothing else it illustrates how you, the $BALN holder, are benefitting directly from the platform’s performance.
-
When pre-converted to BALN and bnUSD, it may seem to many users that they are just receiving rewards (which could of course be funded in a multitude of ways)
Would it be possible to visually enforce the fact that your fees are literally made up out of all the tokens available on Balanced.
I’ve added a little mock-up of what I mean, let me know if you think it would be of added value, or if users should simply know where that daily claimable amount comes from.
6 Likes
Something I don’t like about making it a vote is there is there is no ‘NO’ vote.
Its technically unfeasible to support all the future asset types. Votes cannot change what is possible or not possible. This isn’t a votable situation.
I feel it violates the voting process if a disapproval vote cannot be executed.
EDIT: I have been reminded that I missed the angle of definately needing to somehow condense all the different tokens, but voting on the exact method of condensing them, I retract any objection to a vote.
3 Likes
This is a good feature. I am in support.
I think it’s important to keep bnUSD rewards as you said in your post.
Something to note. It is preferable for me that all conversions be made before distribution to make it easier for users to manage their taxes.
Additional buying pressure on BALN from these conversions would be great. However, the opportunity to receive all rewards in stablecoins during times like a bear market would also be a good feature. I wouldn’t want to be earning BALN in a bear market where I have to pay tax on the received £ value and then the value drops before I liquidate it, big no no.
Awesome you are working on this topic!
Would like to see a button next to each asset with: convert to baln.
That way you can monitor the fees of each asset, choose which asset you want to convert and spread out the selling pressure on those assets.
Maybe also one button with, convert all assets to baln for ease of use
2 Likes
Hi everyone ¬¬¬
I would like to express my opinion, too. I just had a chat with a friend of mine about your proposal. He doesn’t know anything about Balance so I think his opinion could bring some different point of view.
First I will express my opinion. I got attracted to Balanced mainly for two reasons:
- Stake Baln and receive rewards in multiple assets once BTP is implemented.
- The future of Balanced is decided trough voting.
Now without voting you want to make a major decision. This is not what I wanted to see from Balanced. And second I think limiting rewards only to Baln and bnUSD is good only for Balanced believers. This will make it much more difficult to attract users from other blockchains as they will be happier to receive different assets as rewards.
My friend’s thoughts:
I don’t know nothing about Balanced. There are so many projects out there that it is hard to keep up with them. However I like the idea to earn rewards in different assets. I would feel well if I know I will earn Ethereum, Solana, BNB etc.
I hope before YOU guys take a decision we need to try and think outside of the box and have some more discussions. In my opinion it has to be optional and leave the people to have a choice. Also I would like to apologies about my bad English and I hope it is understandable.
4 Likes
I agree with this proposal, yet seeing a breakdown of individual rewards is satisfying it will provide a cleaner UI.
2 Likes
A great proposal for adding buy pressure to BALN. I support it. I wanted sICX part of the reward but honestly anyone can use the bnUSD/BALN they get to buy whatever token they wanted.
Keeping bnUSD as part of the reward pool will cause a barrier for those wanting to sell some of their reward but really wanting to hold as much BALN they can.
How much my BALN earns across each token is still a nice visual to have. So if the data can’t remain on the rewards section when claiming in some manner would be good to have it on the stats page.
With it being a DAO, its over. Anything that will change how Balanced functions needs to be put to a vote. This shouldn’t be challenged at all no matter how good a feature part of the community wants to implement. Thanks Benny for sticking to DAO principles
I agree with keeping sICX if possible.
Disagree with a vote being keeping with DAO principles. I am for as much voting on issues as anyone, but without addressing the technical limitations, it would be a perversion of the DAO principles to vote on something that one choice cannot be carried out. If it can be, I also support putting it to a vote. If they can keep it as seperate assets as the number increases, then sure lets vote.
EDIT: I have been reminded that I missed the angle of definately needing to somehow condense all the different tokens, but voting on the exact method of condensing them, I retract any objection to a vote.
1 Like
Happy with this proposal. Scalable is the big word!
It will take away from me the daily chore of reconciling all of my currencies which will only become more cumbersome as more pairs are added, into BALN. Also, it will add a bit of consistant buy pressure to this great token. (Sound like I’m moaning about free money, I’m not!)
I personally am leaning more on the side of BALN only payouts however I am also open to getting it in bnUSD also as this might help protect those that are overleveraged on BALN once we are able to collatoralise it and essentially provide borrowers breathing space when the market takes a turn which also might encourge borrowing. Perhaps an opt in/out box for bnUSD split?
1 Like
You should deep dive into Optimus then. 
I’d be in support of converting everything to BALN, but keeping bnUSD and sICX. Since the platform runs on ICON, I think it’s appropriate for the native asset to be prioritized as well. That way people don’t view Balanced as something that places sell pressure on ICX/sICX.
7 Likes
I agree with you, but if I get the chance to get iBTC on a daily basis I would rather keep it to be honest. ICX for now is very dependent on market sentiment. I bought baln in anticipation of BTP giving me the chance to diversify my portfolio. Also, guess what a missed chance it would be if people knew they can get BTC basically for free. this is where all the attention is. I hope we could somewhat find a way to still get major assets like BTC. 
3 Likes
After reading all the comments, I understand that this proposal is essential to the platform. May I suggest, if plausible, that if ppl would like to “customize” the tokens that they are getting instead of getting just BALN, it will come with a fee. But this is really not important. Minimizing the transactions for distribution is much more important.
The problem with this method is that everyone’s view of a “major asset” is different. For example, some people don’t hold any Bitcoin and they believe Ethereum will eventually be #1 in market cap – so to them, Ethereum is much more of a typical asset. Okay, so to that we can say let’s make BTC and ETH both available to claim because they’re both major assets! Well… some people don’t hold any BTC and ETH because they feel ADA is THE major asset to own. Okay, so we make BTC, ETH, and ADA available. See where I’m going with this? 