The liquidity for the INDY/ADA pair raised during the launch bowl at MinSwap has deposited around 1M ADA worth of INDY/ADA LP tokens on the SundaeSwap platform. As has been visible during the polls to whitelist SundaeSwap iUSD/iBTC LP tokens, the community does not want to support SundaeSwap. On the other hand, Wingriders seems to have support in the community and MuesliSwap has impressively strong support in the community. Since the latter also started handing out additional yield rewards for iUSD/ADA and has attracted the largest iUSD pool across all DEXs I vouch for the liquidity to move to MuesliSwap. We may keep this decision up to a poll, where also SundaeSwap could be added for fairness.
This is a proposal to check if there is general interest in this topic and I suggest it should be moved to a poll and on-chain proposal if there is sufficient demand behind it.
I love this idea. Agree that as a strongly community supported DEX MuesliSwap deserves the liquidity from the launch bowl.
There would be significant technical effort involved to perform this task. It’d be impossible without a protocol upgrade. Realistically this isn’t something that could happen anytime soon.
Disinterested in this proposal, it’s unnecessary and does not make sense from a user base and TVL standpoint. Check here for TVL:
Arguing based on TVL doesn’t catch me here: the TVL on SundaeSwap is only marginally larger than the one at MuesliSwap currently and lower than WingRiders. Note that a large part of this TVL is made up by the ADA/INDY liquidity we are currently discussing about!
User base is not tracked by DefiLlama but we could get a sense of the general sentiment towards SundaeSwap in the LP-token whitelisting proposals - and SundaeSwap turned out worst by a huge margin.
Every DEX is flawed, and frankly from a protocol design point of view the SundaeSwap team probably has the best product out of all of them, thus far. Every other DEX is centralized, MuesliSwap is illiquid with lack of significant AMM support, and Wingriders has even lost a huge amount of user funds through a bridge exploit implemented out of greed. Let’s not forget how Minswap almost lost all of its user funds, too, perhaps we should be more careful of placing significant amounts of liquidity there? Could use that for the other DEXes. Logically speaking, with the protocol and user in mind, I do not see this proposal being a constructive path for the Indigo DAO to take, and anyone with a significant stake in the Cardano ecosystem and INDY will gladly prove it on-chain. This is a flash mob and nothing else, by every metric it is a widely used protocol for many users, a bunch of spam accounts from former CardStarter investors do not reflect the sentiment of the users of the protocol.
Could you explain a bit more why this would be such an intense task? I support of this proposal. I believe there is more value in supporting these other dex’s with our liquidity. arguably Indy should have liquidity on the exchanges our assets have liquidity to promote better user experiences.