Symmetric Liquidity Baking Escape Vote

As announced in Proposal plans - #11 by rafoo, I have written a small TZIP draft to propose changes to the escape vote of Liquidity Baking. The document can be found here: TZIP draft for "Symmetric Liquidity Baking Escape Vote" (!176) · Merge requests · Tezos / tzip · GitLab.


I have updated the draft with some additional changes to the mechanism:

  • an increase in the precision of the computation of the EMA, and
  • a renaming of the mechanism itself, it is now called “toggle vote” instead of “escape vote”.

I have also clarified the migration logic to explicit that if the escape hatch is used during the lifetime of Hangzhou or Ithaca then this change should not allow to reactivate the feature without another protocol amendment.

1 Like

@rafoo thank you for all your hard work on this, hopefully this helps alleviate community concerns about the feasibility or usability of the liquidity baking escape hatch.

One thought though, since we now have a very refined escape hatch mechanism, maybe it’s time to disable the sunset period. Liquidity Baking seems to be achieving it’s goals, and we seem to just be extending the sunset period every few protocol upgrades anyways. Maybe it’s time to consider Liquidity Baking a permanent feature until such a time that the community decides to turn it off via the escape hatch.

maybe it’s time to disable the sunset period

I agree but there is no hurry to do this because the sunset has just been extended for a long period and this topic is very controversial so let’s discuss this again in a few governance cycles.