ARC-36: Adjust ASTRO Emissions According to the Proposed Incentives Framework

Summary

Adjust all alloc_points for all currently incentivized pools according to the suggestions made in the recently posted Incentives Framework and adjust the per block ASTRO rewards to 17.73 ASTRO.

Abstract

About a month ago, we made a post about a new Incentive Framework which is meant to guide the Astroport community in making decisions regarding which pools should receive ASTRO emissions as well as how much to incentivize each of them. This proposal is meant to be the first one that applies the suggestions made in the Incentive Framework:

Note that the table above doesn’t include the bLUNA-LUNA pool which currently has an alloc_point of 6666 and it incorrectly sets alloc_points for LunaX-LUNA and ampLUNA-LUNA. All three pools containing LUNA derivatives will still have alloc_points set to 6666 if this proposal is executed.

Moreover, note that this proposal aims to set the total ASTRO distributed per block to 17.73, down from approximatelly 19 ASTRO per block.

Lastly, if this proposal passes, we intend to post a second ARC 8 weeks after the proposal’s execution. This ARC will aim to reassess ASTRO emissions once again.

Motivation

The main motivation of this proposal is to gauge the community’s sentiment regarding the new Incentive Framework as well as update all alloc_points and the total ASTRO distributed per block according to the suggestions made in the Framework post.

Security Considerations

The main risk associated with this proposal is that alloc_points or the total ASTRO distributed per block may be set incorrectly and a subsequent proposal might be needed to fix the issues.

Governance Action

The executable message for this proposal looks as follows:

[
  {
    "order": "1",
    "msg": {
      "wasm": {
        "execute": {
          "contract_addr": "terra1ksvlfex49desf4c452j6dewdjs6c48nafemetuwjyj6yexd7x3wqvwa7j9",
          "msg": "ewogICJzZXR1cF9wb29scyI6IHsKICAgICJwb29scyIgOiBbCiAgICAgIFsKICAgICAgICAidGVycmExOG1jbWxmNHYyM2VodWtraDdxeGdwZjV0em56ZzY4OTNmeG1mOWZmbWR0OXBoZ2YzNjV6cXZtbHVnNiIsCiAgICAgICAgIjE1MzgiCiAgICAgIF0sCiAgICAgIFsKICAgICAgICAidGVycmExNmVzams3cXFsZ2g4dzdwMmE1OHl4aGdrZms0eWt2NzJwN2hhMDU2enVsNThhZHpqbTZtc3ZjNjc0dCIsCiAgICAgICAgIjMwMDE4IgogICAgICBdLAogICAgICBbCiAgICAgICAgInRlcnJhMWNrbXNxZGhsa3k5anhjbXR5ajY0Y3Jnemp4YWQ5cHZzZDU4azh6c3hzbnY0dnp2d2R0N3FrZTA0aGwiLAogICAgICAgICI0MDAyNiIKICAgICAgXSwKICAgICAgWwogICAgICAgICJ0ZXJyYTFrZ2dmZDZ6MGFkMms5cTh2MjRmN2Z0eHlxdXNoOGZwOXhrdTlueXJqY3Myd3YwZTRreXBzemZyZmQwIiwKICAgICAgICAiNjY2NiIKICAgICAgXSwKICAgICAgWwogICAgICAgICJ0ZXJyYTFjcTIyZXVneHdncDB4MzRjcWZyeG1kOWpreXk0M2dhczkzeXFqaG13cm03ajBoNWVjcnFxNWo3ZGdwIiwKICAgICAgICAiNjY2NiIKICAgICAgXSwKICAgICAgWwogICAgICAgICJ0ZXJyYTFraHN4d2ZuenV4cWN5emEyc3JheGYybmdrcjNkd3k5ZjdybTB1dHMweHBrZXNoczk2Y2NzcXR1Nm52IiwKICAgICAgICAiMTEyNTciCiAgICAgIF0sCiAgICAgIFsKICAgICAgICAidGVycmExaDN6Mnp2NmF3OTRmeDUyNjNkeTZ0Z3o2Njk5a3htZXdseDN2cmN1NGpqcnVkZzZ4bXR5cWs2dnQwdSIsCiAgICAgICAgIjY2NjYiCiAgICAgIF0sCiAgICAgIFsKICAgICAgICAidGVycmExY2VzNms2anA3cXpranB3c2w2eGc0Zjd6ZndyZTB1MjNjZ2xnNjloaGozZzIwZmh5Z3Rwc3UyNGRzeSIsCiAgICAgICAgIjIxNTIiCiAgICAgIF0KICAgIF0KICB9Cn0=",
          "funds": []
        }
      }
    }
  }
]

The decoded version of the msg looks as follows:

{
  "setup_pools": {
    "pools" : [
      [
        "terra18mcmlf4v23ehukkh7qxgpf5tznzg6893fxmf9ffmdt9phgf365zqvmlug6",
        "1538"
      ],
      [
        "terra16esjk7qqlgh8w7p2a58yxhgkfk4ykv72p7ha056zul58adzjm6msvc674t",
        "30018"
      ],
      [
        "terra1ckmsqdhlky9jxcmtyj64crgzjxad9pvsd58k8zsxsnv4vzvwdt7qke04hl",
        "40026"
      ],
      [
        "terra1kggfd6z0ad2k9q8v24f7ftxyqush8fp9xku9nyrjcs2wv0e4kypszfrfd0",
        "6666"
      ],
      [
        "terra1cq22eugxwgp0x34cqfrxmd9jkyy43gas93yqjhmwrm7j0h5ecrqq5j7dgp",
        "6666"
      ],
      [
        "terra1khsxwfnzuxqcyza2sraxf2ngkr3dwy9f7rm0uts0xpkeshs96ccsqtu6nv",
        "11257"
      ],
      [
        "terra1h3z2zv6aw94fx5263dy6tgz6699kxmewlx3vrcu4jjrudg6xmtyqk6vt0u",
        "6666"
      ],
      [
        "terra1ces6k6jp7qzkjpwsl6xg4f7zfwre0u23cglg69hhj3g20fhygtpsu24dsy",
        "2152"
      ]
    ]
  }
}

Disclaimers/Conflicts of Interest

The author is a paid service provider of Delphi Labs Ltd. Additionally, the author has a development stake of ASTRO tokens.

3 Likes

The bluna proposal set the allocation for all three LSD tokens (lunax, ampluna and bluna) equal. I think they are all now set at 6666 points.

If I understand this correctly what you are now proposing is to lower the bluna allocation to 5000 while you increase the other two to 7504?

I think this is not a good take.

1 Like

In the first paragraph under the chart, he states that we would all continue to receive an alloc_point of 6666.

We agree with you if we are mistaken though.

:pirate_flag::saluting_face:

The proposal has been edited since my post, it stated to set bluna pool to 5000 points (you can see it if you click at the pen icon at the upper right corner of the post)

I also agree the updated proposal.

Thanks for noticing the correct alloc_points! I also updated the post with the on-chain message

I apologize if I missed a discussion on this already, but why is axlUSDC-axlUST still so heavily incentivized? It’s fee generation is very low, and there are no other pairs that have axlUST. If anything, this is just a stable farm for people who want to farm astro but does nothing to add value or revenue to astroport, right? How does astroport benefit from having deep liquidity in this pair? If astroport needs this pool deep for expansion into multi chain, then I would understand, but currently I do not.

2 Likes

Yea I also don’t get why axlUSDC-axlUSDT has so much incentives. There is no other pair that uses USDT, so why have it?

1 Like

(post deleted by author)

According to the framework incentives for a pair can only be reduced by 25% per update proposal, each of which must be at least 8 weeks apart. The ratio of fees to incentives for that pair is high but it will take a few more proposals to get them inline with the desired ratio.

1 Like

Ah, yes! I wasn’t sure if that stipulation applied to this updated framework or only to the future proposals. In that case, yes I see that it has been reduced to the maximum it can be in in one proposal (25%)- the same goes for the vkr pool. Thank you for the clarification!

1 Like