Summary This proposal aims to allocate up to X TRU/weekly to the reimbursement of gas costs for users migrating from TrueFi V1 to V2 and/or moving out of the Uniswap TRU/ETH pool to SushiSwap.
Background
After the team shared their plans to move our TRU incentives from Uniswap to Sushiswap, community members including myself expressed concern (see Discord links below) that prohibitively high gas fees would be a blocker to a smooth migration. This same concern applies to the teams upcoming migration from TrueFi V1 to TrueFiV2. Lenders, Stakers, and LPs should not spend more than what they are making in order to migrate.
Motivation
Gas costs as of late have been a hindrance to TRU Lenders, Stakers, and LPs. The team are keeping an eye on the various scaling solutions being tested by leading DeFi projects and will act when there is a clear winner (Optimism vs ZK-Rollups vs AVAX, etc). Until then, they need to make migrating a simple decision for TrueFi users by subsidising gas costs related to migrating from Uniswap to Sushiswap as well as TrueFi V1 to TrueFI V2.
Specification
Reimbursements would be made in TRU, while gas is priced in terms of ETH, so a conversion is required. The price oracle would be CoinGecko’s API, with the median TRU/ETH price from the week being used for all that week’s reimbursements.
Claims would be made available via the same MerkleRedeem contract currently used in the liquidity mining program. Reimbursements and liquidity mining proceeds for the week would be summed and be claimable in a single transaction.
Poll
To keep this simple, please vote on just 2 options:
YES - compensation should be paid for the cost of migrating between platforms
@leecrowhurst - this seems like a pretty reasonable proposal to me. Not sure how technically we would implement this though, because I don’t think there’s any way for a smart contract to see if your address has made the migration (smart contracts can’t see blockchain events).
We would probably need to manually send out the TRU but that might end up being a lot of work depending on how many LPs there are. Not sure what to do here, would love to hear proposals.
Am open to extending the Uniswap farm until this is figured out if folks would prefer that.
So if you know the ETH wallet address, could you guys run similar code to see if the wallet was in the Uniswap pool between certain dates, existed on x date, entered the SushiSwap pool on y date, and those exit and enter transactions cost z amount of ETH? There will also be the gas cost to exit then renter the TrueFi farms too?
I would rather the team spend their time and resources on improving the protocol. I’m pretty sure that would be better for the protocol as a whole, and to the extent that improvements get reflected in an increased value of my TRU, it’s probably also worth more to me personally than a gas reimbursement. Unlike the TFI-LP bug reimbursements, I also think that we aren’t particularly owed reimbursements in this case - this change feels to me more like the kind of thing we signed up for. (I recognize that people farming a smaller amount are getting hurt more by the fixed gas costs, so I won’t be working to convince anyone else to vote No.)
I actually agree with @benjamincosman that, while this is a nice-to-have, if it will take significant resources then it would be better to focus on our roadmap and make all the farmers money by helping TRU to be successful. If it was free or very low cost in terms of eng time then I would still do it.
We do need to be willing to say no to things that could distract from the long-term, or other projects could outpace us.
One option could be to simply log the reimbursements now and pay out the reimbursements later on once some of the higher value eng items have been completed.
I asked one of our developers how long it might actually take to do this. I also posted in the Sushiswap Discord to see if any other teams have done this and have existing code we might be able to fork and/or modify
Maybe this is something that the Sushi team would be willing to handle for us? We pay the TRU for it, but they handle the distribution. They have an interest in supporting migration anyway!
I think reimbursing users for the migration costs is more effort than it is worth. How many users are we talking about in reality, likely somewhere between 30-200. The easier thing would be to juice the rewards for the first week but I don’t think it is worth the hassle.
Hearing both sides of this throughout the conversation. It’s both:
A great show of faith and convenient for our users, specifically smaller users which would be forced to pay high gas costs
It’s probably not valuable enough to justify diverting engineering resources. I’m directly in touch with the Sushi team now and asking what we can do
Thank you to everyone that has voted and commented.
Some really good points made so far… please keep them coming.
Lots of comments around diverting dev time to “build” this. Could the same result be achieved without the need to build/code functionality to do it? As this will be 2, 1 off events in the history of TrueFi - could this be managed via a simple “offline” method?
My personal opinion is that I don’t want to spend one minute of the team’s time on this. We should be focused on long-term success, not one-time short-term blips like this.
The reason for me voting no is to make sure team is focused on other big things. But I agree to help small investors in any way. If the question was whether to work on this now or later, I would have voted for later later.
If we were to put dev time into this, it would be in the form of a “migrate” button for both farms, which could include gas reimbursement. It would go something like:
Migrate ETH/TRU to Sushiswap
unstake full balance of UNI-LP tokens from TrueFi farm
migrate UNI-LP tokens to Sushiswap
deposit SLP tokens into new TrueFi farm
reimburse gas fees
Migrate TUSD/TFI-LP to TrueFi
unstake full balance of UNI-LP tokens from TrueFi Farm
remove liqudidity from Uniswap
deposit TUSD into TrueFi lending pool
deposit TFI-LP tokens into new TrueFi farm
reimburse gas fees
This way, it’s easy for people to migrate all their liquidity in one transaction, rather than doing all those steps individually (and potentially moving liquidity elsewhere). Just depends on how much dev work it will take and scope of security audits.
