How are the buybacks triggered?

Is it done automatically or manually? If it is done manually who makes the decision?

automatically via a keeper. in order for any smart contract to execute an outside source needs to trigger it. that’s how smartcontracts behaves.

Thanks. What is a keeper? What are the criteria that the keeper uses? How can one predict when the next buyback will occur?

A keeper is a concept in smart contract dev, worth reading about if you are interested in the tech.
The all idea is that no one will be able to predict it to avoid gamification.

I see. I thought the buybacks were weekly. I can understand why some randomness is desirable, but there has been no buyback for a few weeks now. I wouldn’t have thought there would be that degree of randomness built into the code. It’s not the case that someone has manually stopped the buybacks, right?

They are indeed supposed to be weekly, there is a fix to be applied and then they will resume. i’m not a developer so take it with a grain of sult, but smart contracts does not have randomness in them ( anyone can calculate it and manipulate it), it mean that they have stop being triggered at the moment but all the yields are still accumalating on the collector and treasury contracts.

1 Like

Initially, anyone could trigger buybacks. “The team” then pushed code that prevented that from happening. They did that without consulting anyone. They stop and start buybacks without consultation and without notice. What is to to stop them from buying immediately prior to restarting the buybacks? The last time they did this there were several months worth of buybacks held back.

This is yet another example of the contempt in which this project hold the investors.

Never said they have prevented access to others, to be honest i dont think they can even if they wanted to. They only stoped triggering it from the “outside”, anyone can invoke it. Where have you seen that it’s “prevented”? i would like to look into that. The “last time it happed” it was even invoked once by someone else then the team.

I’m not sure where I saw it, most likely Telegram or Twitter. If you don’t know about it then perhaps I’m mistaken. If the team were active on this board, or anywhere else, it would be a simple matter to check with them.

The buybacks are weekly, but they have been halted due to the current bug with the “unstaking period” that has caused balances to, well, get off balance.

Stopping it means less fixing afterwards, so I understand that decision.

You are right about the protection mechanism, the updated treasury contract validates whether the “owner” is calling it:

But is that really a problem? Should anyone be able to trigger buy-backs? I’m not sure TBH… What are the other protocols doing?
I guess that would be the true benchmark :slight_smile:

astro is allowing anyone to trigger buybacks. It allows for an element of gaming

I would say that it is a problem.

  1. Whoever has the ability to stop and start the buybacks has insider knowledge and can make use of that knowledge for financial gain.

  2. The “team”, whoever they are, or whoever he is, should not make fundamental changes like this without authority from the stakeholders.

  3. The audit was carried out with that code in place.

I don’t have specific examples from other projects but I know that the good ones, which include just about any project on Terra, go out of their way to disallow any possibility of malfeasance on the part of the team.

Even if the Pylon “team” does not have any ill intentions, this style of autocratic governance is entirely out of place.