Indigo terminology choices

Graveyard
1

I’d like to get some community feedback about different choices for terminology of Indigo capabilities/features.

Indigo’s tokenomics currently is broken down into 6 terms:

  1. Stability Pool
  2. iAsset LP
  3. $INDY Stakers
  4. DEX Staking / Airdrop
  5. Community Funds
  6. Team Distribution

0_nYXvZ-s6-74vO6_N
0_nYXvZ-s6-74vO6_N816×666 84.9 KB

DEX Staking / Airdrop has since been renamed to Initial Token Distribution (ITD). Team Distribution remains the same but may be shortened to be simply Team. The other terms however could be changed to be more descriptive/meaningful.

Proposal 1:

Rename groups to:

  1. Stability Stakers
  2. Liquidity Proofers
  3. Governance Delegators
  4. ITD
  5. DAO Treasury
  6. Team

Terminology usage:

  1. Stability Staking. Stake your iAssets to an Indigo Stability Pool — earn INDY and liquidation rewards.
  2. Liquidity Proofing. Prove to an Indigo Liquidity Provider Pool that you’re providing iAssets as liquidity to a DEX — earn INDY as a reward.
  3. Governance Delegating. Delegate your INDY towards Indigo Governance proposals — earn INDY as a reward plus your share of Indigo Protocol fees.

You stake iAssets to a Stability Pool because your iAssets are at risk of loss to maintain protocol stability in exchange for compensation. You become a Stability Staker and are rewarded via Stability Staking distributions.

You prove that you’re a DEX liquidity provider either by depositing DEX LP tokens to a Liquidity Provider Pool or following instructions for one of Indigo’s partnered DEXs. You become a Liquidity Proofer and are rewarded via Liquidity Proofing distributions.

You delegate your INDY to vote for or against Indigo Governance proposals. You become a Governance Delegator and are rewarded via Governance Delegating distributions.

Proposal 2:

Rename groups to:

  1. Stability Stakers
  2. Liquidity Stakers
  3. Governance Delegators
  4. ITD
  5. DAO Treasury
  6. Team

Terminology usage:

  1. Stability Staking. Stake your iAssets to an Indigo Stability Pool — earn INDY and liquidation rewards.
  2. Liquidity Staking. Provision iAssets to a DEX and stake to an Indigo Liquidity Provider Pool — earn INDY as a reward.
  3. Governance Delegating. Delegate your INDY towards Indigo Governance proposals — earn INDY as a reward plus your share of Indigo Protocol fees.

You stake iAssets to a Stability Pool because your iAssets are at risk of loss to maintain protocol stability in exchange for compensation. You become a Stability Staker and are rewarded via Stability Staking distributions.

You provision your iAssets to a DEX liquidity pool and either stake your DEX LP tokens to a Liquidity Provider Pool or follow instructions for one of Indigo’s partnered DEXs. You become a Liquidity Staker and are rewarded via Liquidity Staking distributions.

You delegate your INDY to vote for or against Indigo Governance proposals. You become a Governance Delegator and are rewarded via Governance Delegating distributions.

Proposal 3:

  1. Stability
  2. Liquidity
  3. Governance
  4. ITD
  5. DAO Treasury
  6. Team

Terminology usage:

  1. Stability. Stake your iAssets to an Indigo Stability Pool — potentially earn INDY and liquidation rewards.
  2. Liquidity. Provision iAssets as liquidity to a DEX — potentially earn INDY as a reward.
  3. Governance. Vote on Governance proposals using your INDY — potentially earn INDY as a reward plus your share of Indigo Protocol fees.

You stake iAssets to a Stability Pool because your iAssets are at risk of loss to maintain protocol stability in exchange for compensation. You’re now providing Stability and are rewarded via Stability distributions.

You stake your iAssets to a DEX and either stake your LP tokens to a Liquidity Provider Pool or follow instructions for one of Indigo’s partnered DEXs. You’re now providing Liquidity and are rewarded via Liquidity distributions.

You stake your INDY to vote for or against Indigo Governance proposals. You’re now participating in Governance and are rewarded via Governance distributions.

Summary
Some of this terminology can be mixed and matched. Proposal 1 has the benefit of differentiating between the different types of yield generation within Indigo. Proposal 2 has the benefit of using familiar DeFi terminology. Proposal 3 has the benefit of being simple.

Please share your thoughts on which terminology you think is most appropriate.

20 Likes
2

I prefer for second proposal “liquidity strakers” easier to understand.

1 Like
3

I would go with proposal 1 or 2.
Proposal 3 is easiest but Indigo doesn’t have to be easy :wink:

1 Like
4

if i may suggest

  1. Stability Reward
  2. LP Reward
  3. Governance Reward
  4. ITD
  5. DAO Treasury
  6. Team

but if not I prefer the 3rd proposal, simple

4 Likes
5

Proposal 2 would have to be my choice

3 Likes
6

I do think that we need to think about newcomers from other DeFi and try to use as popular names as possible, so they would dive in faster and easier .
I would go with nr. 2
:space_invader: :space_invader: :space_invader:

1 Like
7

How about:

  1. Stability Rewards
  2. Liquidity Rewards
  3. Governance Rewards
  4. ITD
  5. DAO Treasury
  6. Team

You stake iAssets to a Stability Pool because your iAssets are at risk of loss to maintain protocol stability in exchange for compensation. You become a Stability Staker and are distributed Stability Rewards.

You prove that you’re a DEX liquidity provider either by depositing DEX LP tokens to a Liquidity Provider Pool or following instructions for one of Indigo’s partnered DEXs. You become a Liquidity Proofer and are distributed Liquidity Rewards.

You delegate your INDY to vote for or against Indigo Governance proposals. You become a Governance Delegator and are distributed Governance Rewards.

6 Likes
8

Stakers feels really weird to me, so does Proofers. As mentioned by @heruahmadsidik, reward is an okay term but I rather use the term Providers or just none at all and keep it simple with proposal 3. Can we also do a community vote on this? the first 3 as choices and perhaps an ‘Others’ Category, or we wait for some other names to come up and we decide?

2 Likes
9

Edit: Changed my mind due to ease of terminology use. Going with proposal 2.

10

Proposal 2 seems to be easier and handy to understand than other proposals to me.

11

I prefer 3. Keeping names succinct and simple, when possible, is usually the best way to go. It makes it easier to refer to when talking about or telling new people about a project.

I also like the use of “potentially” in the terminology. If there are periods of time when rewards are small or zero, people wont feel like they were misled.

1 Like
12

I’d totally go for Proposal 3.
However, I’d also like to see:
Governance Incentives or Governance Rewards instead of just Governance.
Not every single project out there incentivises Governance so I think it’ll be nice to make that clear.
Otherwise it could be understood that the tokens are allocated just to develop the governance as opposed to also incentivising the participants.

1 Like
13

The fork in the road is whether to use DeFi terms or try to improve on these, reinventing them in some way. If we reinvent, the only sensible approach is to use something an average person might understand. That’s actually quite difficult and depends a lot more on marketing and on the quality of documentation than on the actual words used. The words do need to appeal to people generally, or at least not put them off.

1 Like
14

I also prefer Proposal 2. ‘Staker’ and ‘Delegator’ are descriptive of what the user does, whereas ‘Reward’ is focused on what the user gets. For me this seems clearer, and I agree that it will be fairly intuitive for new users to understand their role and be a little clearer about what they are doing in relation to the functioning of the protocol.

15

Yup
proposal 2 seems to be a nice blend of simplicity but still informative

16

Proposal 3, simple and objective.
1.Stability
2.Liquidity
3.Governance
4.ITD
5.DAO Treasury
6.Team

17

I think Proposal 3 would be best.

18

One thing, the options are several. But, do we intend to reflect what it is or what it would bring to the user? For example, if we want the former, we would keep the stability pool; if we want the second stability staker. For me, it would be best to put it this way: Stability pool/stability staker, so everything that it implies is reflected.

1 Like
19

After spending some time going over the pros/cons of the three proposals, I prefer Proposal #2. Proposal #2 has the benefit of being easier to understand for the typical person than the more granular Proposal #1. Proposal #2 also gives enough granularity needed to understand the requirements to receive rewards over Proposal #3 which although simple does not say you will receive rewards just the “potential” to receive them.

1 Like
20

I’ll go with no. 3 - keep it simple.