The maximum change in incentives should only be increased to a maximum of 40%.
50% is chosen as a random destination without any based analysis. A smaller step allows to check whether the intended goal is achieved in the market.
Unfortunately all shown data is based on not including single-sided entries into stableswap pools as fee generation, while they do generate fees for Astroport. We have seen that many users of stableswap pools like USDC-USDT or LUNA-[LSD] are using this kind of enter / exit process, which is not reflected in the data or the GUI. Without having the right data available we can’t make the right choice.
Maybe off-topic, but an important part of the discussion started by John.
Stride is playing a dangerous game here right now in Cosmos against free market and competition. John argues using “incumbent” as a negative while all projects receiving incentives have built hard since May 2022 and doing the best for Terra’s and Astroport’s revival. Stride has decided to launch on Osmosis first, ignoring Astroport and even now we are not talking about bringing stATOM, stOSMO which would be a lot more valuable for the Terra ecosystem!
They are activly forcing other chains and projects to make exclusive deals and being anti-competitive right now. In the meantime claiming Astroport is not allowing free competition.
Growing Terra also grows Astroport and this is not the goal of Stride.