Also, curious…what mindset does it attract and how does it conflict with the goals of the project? Are you suggesting attracting less sophisticated investors is beneath this project?
The market determines the price, so not sure what to make of that comment.
As for mindset, it was explained by others in this thread, but it appeals to uninformed speculators. We don’t need to drum up buyer support, there is already plenty of buy pressure as it is, so changing the denomination is not really solving any problem.
The discussion is about splitting the token. You can extrapolate that given a certain split, the price of the token will follow that split, as you mentioned, by how the market values the asset. In essence a split lowers the price, hopefully that helps. Hence a split lowers the price.
Price doesn’t prevent someone from evaluating the merits of the project.
I think it’s quite ironic that attracting “uninformed speculators” is frowned upon when one of the main ideas of the project is to help those who may struggle with allocating the capital themselves in the best way.
I also think it’s presumptuous to think that someone who may not understand ownership of market cap, will also not understand the project’s goals.
Ye, the gas sucks for voting so I myself tho being a smaller player dont vote as much as I should.I see the benefits of this protocol. I’m in this for the long haul. And one of the things that drew me the most was the limited amount of coins. That peeks investors. And o must say I’m so dam glad I found you guys. Happy to be apart of this amazing team.
It’s nothing more than an accounting gimmick. If something like this were to pass it would signal to me that the project is failing on its own merits, but ultimately that would be for the market to decide.
You’re conflating two things, YFI token governance and the yearn.finance protocol. The token is ultimately about governing the protocol and works best when you turn speculators into value drivers. If we make the protocol accessible, some people may want to also help govern, and those are the people we want to attract. We should be marketing and pushing the protocol, not the token.
It is true, people buy a token based on its actual price and not what its worth, which is dumb.
So let’s look at it objectively.
Do you want people that think “xrp is a good investment because its less than a dollar, and I can buy more of them” making decisions in yearn governance?
Fuk no
It makes zero impact to your share of the market cap or governance power whether your $1000 is represented by 1 unit or 100 units of said token.
What it does though is attract people with the wrong mindset. We do not want them here.
Look at how the recent grant donation vote has gone in YFI vs YAM.
Yearn gov is overwhelmingly for it, the YAM gov are against it. ( That being said there are some people in the yam vote saying, hey we are for it, but currently we shouldnt be focussing on donations just yet since we havent actually launched, which is true and good for them…but again, as a group they are against it)
Opposed 1000000%
Nah, not conflating. It’s not a complicated concept.
This is kind of of a funny statement given the opposite is happening and it’s fairly impactful.
People who buy YFI are defi investors; people who use Yearn are defi investors. It’s the exact same demographic. When you research YFI, you learn about Yearn. In fact, I’d be curious to know how many people started using Yearn just because they either farmed YFI and learned about it or researched and invested in YFI. I’d venture to say many.
YFI is literally one of the most popular defi tokens and is discussed nonstop on Twitter causing more and more people to discover YFI and ultimately Yearn… It’s free advertising. YFI’s brand is as strong if not stronger than Yearn the product. Promoting the token promotes the product. You’d literally be shooting yourself in the foot by saying don’t promote YFI lol.
If who you attract is your chief concern, that ship has sailed. Literally anyone can go to uniswap and buy the token and the fact that it’s a top defi project means that is exactly what is happening.
If small YFI holders want governance power doesn’t the time weighted voting discussion aiming to do that? No point in splitting the tokens.
As small and recent investor myself, i would say that i’m more interested in a easy access (or user friendly if you rather call it) than a split. Like, it’s been 2 weeks that i look every video/article/doc and i still dont really understand how to vote.
Like where to send my token to vote, what’s the reward doing so, does v2 means YFII token or can i use my YFI…
So far, it’s for me the main obstacle to jump in, not my fairly low share
Btw any useful link would be welcome
Governance is not the reason for splitting the token. Splitting the token doesn’t change governance or ownership. Time weighted or not.
Did you read the faq?
Oh yeah, actually i manage to find an old topic linking to the doc section and managed to stake/vote !
Still wouldn’t say it was a walk in the park but thanks for the link
Provenance : Courrier pour Windows 10
Agreed. It’s certainly a trade-off, and the memes/community interaction with a more weighted YFI price is likely more important. However, it doesn’t mean there isn’t room to improve going further. IMO, streamlining the voting system and spreading clear educational pieces like articles or tutorials is probably the best way to gradually increase the voting spread.
It’s a governance token, no split.
This thread aged well.
Wonder why we launched WOOFY with massive supply, priced in pennies, pegged to YFI…hmmm