Understood. The data shows that long-tail tokens generate very few volumes and way lower fees compared to the high-cap ones. Very hard to make the case for the future but automation can be the solution if the circumstances change.
If the vote donāt pass you will still be able to push the smart contract optimizations youāre mentioning. And it will be even more optimized WITHOUT those additional 2 conditions (Whitelist+Surplus cap).
You donāt even need the DAO approval to push smart contract optimization that doesnāt change DAOs revenue/profit sharing/surplus.
So anyway itās a big win.
The idea is about passing on few thousand dollars worth few cents to few hundreds of dollars a year in order to build more reliability and efficiency
ParaSwap SC execution cost will be even more efficient without those 2 conditions in the smart contract, itās a fact.
If execution cost is cheaper > we generate more volumes > we generate more revenue
So Letās push the Smart Contract optimizations WITHOUT the conditions.
Itāll be a Win for everyone
If itās not a whitelist, weāll have to replace it with a blacklist because of the issues stated before regarding rebase tokensā¦ so weāll end up with the exact same gas cost
You donāt HAVE TO add a blacklist nor a whitelist nor a 1% surplus capā¦
Itās a permissionless smart contract, partners issues are not linked to the smart contract but on how they integrated ParaSwap SDK/API on their (d)App, itās a UI/UX integration issue not SC.
And regarding rebase tokens, if there is nothing to do on the integration/partner part about that, then just the fact that itās more cost effective to execute the SC with rebase tokens as surplus should not be a reason to make the execution cost more for ParaSwap Users.
cheaper execution > cheaper price > more volumes > more revenue
100% agree and Iām glad that we also agree that the gas cost for the whitelist is not gonna be a problem.
The 1% cap has 3 objectives:
- protecting users against excessive fees due to various factors (bugs, volatilityā¦). 1% is already very high compared to industry standards.
- reliability: taking that much fees make many users upset and vocale about the bad experience they had with us which leads into a bad branding.
- capturing more volume for small cap tokens as the vast majority of volumes come from meta aggregators where the gas is the main factor for price, which explains why paraswp has very little exposure to low cap tokens including meme coinsā¦ itās just too expensive to brand ouselves to a lot of crypto users that like to trade these kind of tokens.
No I donāt agree, adding 2 (unnecessary) conditions in the smart contract will cost more to execute than without.
I gas terms:
if isBlacklist() = if isWhitelist()
No condition at all is better in term of gas
We have no choice, rebase tokens cause reverts because of FeeClaimer