With the release of the new Medium article talking about governance, I think it’s important that we put our money where our mouth is – governance never voted on Pylon Scout and the community has been very vocal about how it will do more harm than good.
Pylon Scout is effectively an auction where new protocols sell a fixed number of tokens and investors deposit UST with the ultimate price being set at Total UST divided by # of Tokens. The idea being this is a “fair” launch where any number of people can participate with everyone getting the same price.
The problem: People ape into the launch expecting “IDO returns” (like Nexus), only to dump when they don’t see the price going up. This is compounded by the fact that this mechanism sucks all the buyers out of the market (i.e. everyone has access) so no one is there to buy post launch.
This isn’t a theoretical problem either – Party Parrot on Solana was crushed by this and the ensuing FUD that was generated. Yes, there were factors at play (low initial liquidity) but the discord group quickly turned from upbeat and hyped to toxic. This left the team doing constant damage control rather than putting to work the large amount of capital they just raised.
This also isn’t dissimilar to the current NFT problem Terra is facing – floor prices plummeting instantly after launch and screams of “sweep floor” drowning out the team trying to execute their vision.
A secondary problem is that this model does nothing to reward MINE stakers. Unlike the first problem this one is readily solvable – large airdrop of tokens for stakers, minimum staking amounts with caps on amount you can invest; however, thus far there’s been no suggestion that the team intends to solve it.
Tl;dr: Pylon Scout’s launch should be put to a governance vote before rolling it outand the team should write out a detailed post about how they intent to solve the clear problems & how it will be beneficial for MINE stakers.
This is exactly the point of having a governance system. The medium article says you’re serious about using it, then use it.