►
Description
Collateral Onboarding Call #28: Synthetix
Intro by @JuanJuan
SNX - https://synthetix.io/
Agenda and Discussion:
https://forum.makerdao.com/t/collateral-onboarding-call-28-synthetix-wednesday-february-24-21-00-utc/6650
Governance Forum:
https://forum.makerdao.com/
Disclaimer: These calls and the summaries are produced and hosted by MakerDAO community members. Content produced by the community are not the statements or views of the Maker Foundation.
A
A
B
B
So
this
is
done
on
like
the
depot
where
people
can
just
buy
susd
for
a
dollar
it's
on
uniswap
and
it's
the
biggest
liquidity
hub
right
now
is
on
curve.
You've
got
s
usd
paired
with
usdc
dye
and
usdt,
so
stakers
allow
stakers,
create
susd
and
allow
traders
to
enter
the
synthetics
ecosystem
right
and
sort
of
the.
B
The
novel
idea
here
is
that
the
biggest
one
of
the
biggest
problems
in
d5
is
sort
of
the
long
tail
liquidity
problem
as
I'd
call
it
where,
as
soon
as
you
start
supporting
trading
between
multiple
assets,
the
liquidity
dries
up
pretty
quickly.
So
if,
on
exchange
the
more
different
assets
you
support,
you'll
have
some
liquidity
for
the
top.
B
You
know
three
or
four
assets,
but
as
as
it
goes
down,
you
have
almost
not
no
liquidity
for
the
pairs,
so
synthetics
has
sort
of
the
I'd
say,
I
guess
brilliant
innovation
of
saying
all
right,
we're
just
going
to
get
rid
of
all
that
we
don't
require
people
to
supply.
You
know
liquidity
in
these
specific
assets,
the
lps
don't
decide
what
what
el?
B
What
kind
of
lp
they're,
providing
that
the
traders
decide
what
kind
of
liquidity
they
want,
and
I
guess
at
first
that
like
sounds
a
little
bit
scary,
but
you
have
to
remember
that
as
a
synthetic
staker,
you
also
hold
sense.
So
you
can
trade
between
between
sense
yourself
and
hedge
against
this
debt
right.
B
So
this
all
takes
place
with
the
synthetics
like
infinite
liquidity
mechanism,
which
is
where,
as
a
holder
of
susd,
you
can
trade
it
with
the
synthetics
exchange,
which
is
just
a
contract
that,
when
you
make
the
trade
on
demand
burns
the
assets
that
you
send
it
and
creates
the
assets
that
you
want
from
it.
So
if
you
buy
one
sbtc
with
susd
it
when
you
send
it
the
susd,
it
destroys
that
susd
and
creates
that
sbtc
right.
A
C
A
B
So
all
that
has
to
be
done
is
like
stabilizing
sort
of
key
assets
like
s
eth
and
susd
against
eth
and
other
stable
coins,
and
then
once
you're
in
the
ecosystem.
You
don't
have
any
liquidity
problems
right
and
so
it
it
removes
that
kind
of
fractional,
fractionalized
liquidity
issue
by
saying
all
right
we
just
have
to.
We
can
just
concentrate
on
these
like
two
or
three
top
assets
that
people
use
to
enter
and
exit
the
system.
A
A
B
B
That's
that's
about
what
it
is.
I've
proposed
both
onboarding
synthetics
token
itself,
as
well
as
susd
there's.
There
are
kind
of
different
considerations
for
each
of
them
for
synthetics
I'd
say
the
the
strength
is
that
it's
like
very
liquid,
very
large
market
cap,
supported
on.
Like
many
exchanges,
you
know
it's
again,
it's
it's
as
liquid
as
maker
right,
a
big
big
mark
market
cap
as
maker.
B
I
think
also
synthetics
is
innately
a
collateral
backing
token
right,
so
in
like
in
its
native
environment,
it
is
used
as
collateral
right,
so
this
sort
of,
but
in
a
slightly
different
way,
as
I
mentioned
right,
so
this
sort
of
adds
a
different
use
for
synthetics,
right
and
sort
of.
I
think
they
they
are
synergistic
right.
B
At
the
end
right,
it's
like
people
will
want
this
token
because
they
have
this
other
strong
use
for
it,
then,
looking
at
the
the
s
usd
application,
it
is
less
liquid
than
synthetics
right
smaller
market
cap,
but
I
think
a
lot
of
the
value
in
this
is
that
it
is
a
stable
coin
right.
So
it
will
behave
much
like
usd
where
the
value
isn't
going
to
fluctuate
that
much.
You
don't
have
to
have
a
super
high
over
collateralization
ratio.
B
B
A
David
raises
a
good
point
on
the
on
the
chat,
saying
that
he's
curious
to
see
what
the
risk
assessment
will
be
so
potentially,
if
everything's
being
backed
by
the
snx
token,
then
well,
just
a
drop
in
that
token
would
potentially
trigger
several
liquidations
on
the
system.
I
don't
know
if
there's
any
any
mechanisms
to
prevent
that.
B
So
I
I
think
synthetics
does
have
a
liquidation
mechanism
itself.
When
you
get
down
to
200
percent
collat
over
collateralization,
so
low
right,
then
you
get,
I
think,
liquidated
within
like
three
days
or
so,
or
it
might
be
even
faster
now
and
then
again,
it's
like
as
far
as
I've
noticed
like
so
the
sort
of
expected
value
of
staking
synthetics
without
doing
any
other
hedging
goes
up
when
the
market's
in
a
downturn,
because,
like
your
debt,
is
going
to
be
decreasing
right
and
sort
of.
B
In
addition
to
debt
backing
holding
synthetics
or
staking
synthetics
gives
you
the
revenues
of
the
synthetics
exchange
right
so
sort
of
the
the
key
like
profit.
Expectation
of
a
synthetic
stake
here
is
that
everyone
who
is
trading
between
synths
in
exchange
for
the
the
wonderful
features
of
the
infinite
liquidity
and
not
having
to
deal
with
slippage.
You
pay
a
0.3
percent
fee
and
this
fee
goes
to
stakers
right.
So,
essentially,
when
the
market
is
in
a
downturn,
the
trading
fees
generally
go
up
right
as
well
as
the
debt
is
going
down.
B
A
D
D
C
Well,
so
so
I
think
the
the
situation
we
have
now
with
the
the
current
you
know
snx
market
structure
is
you
know
it
is
a
deeply
liquid
token.
It's
it's
got
a
large
market
cap,
but
in
order
to
get
any
leverage
on
it
other
than
maybe
through
ave
you,
you
have
to
participate
in
the
deadpool,
and
so
I
think
the
ability
to
you
know
not
have
to
participate
in
the
deadpool
and
and
just
be
able
to
use
it
in
maker
as
a
form
of
collateral
and
borrow
against.
It
would
be.
D
Cool
yeah,
that
was
a
perfectly
articulate
answer
to
the
question
I
was
trying
to
ask.
I
appreciate
that
the
the
follow-up
was
the
collateralization
ratio,
with
the
recommendation
to
be
like
match
the
same
liquidation
risk
for
stakers
if
you're.
Basically,
like
I'm
an
asset
next
person,
I
want
a
stake
on
which
thing,
which
one
am
I
going
to
choose,
which
is
a
healthier
relationship
to
have.
C
Yeah,
so
I
think
again,
like
structurally
there's
some
issues
with
liquidations
on
on
synthetics
right
now,
so
we
can't
liquidate
escrowed
tokens,
but
they
are,
they
can
be
used
as
collateral.
So
you
know
that's
one
reason
why
we
have
a
very
high
collateralization
ratio.
I
think
there's
also
kind
of
systemic
risk
to
having
a
lower
collateralization
ratio
that
you
could
have
like
cascading
liquidations.
I
think
that's
less
of
a
concern
for
maker.
C
It's
you
know
it's
just
using
its
collateral.
It's
not
worried
about
the
overall
system,
health
and
susde
and
all
the
synths
and
everything
it
might
become
more
problematic
if
susp
was
also
a
form
of
collateral,
but
it
was
just
snx.
I
think
you
guys
could
be
kind
of
you
know,
agnostic
to
any
liquidation
risks
or
anything
like
that
and
could
probably
get
away
with
lower
collateralization
ratio.
D
Sure
yeah,
I
was
just
asking
what
the
plan
was
for
liquidating
susd
urns.
If
there's
even
a
need
for
that.
In
comparison,
we
we
do
liquidate.
Tether
earns
and
I
think
tether
is
the
only
stable
coin
we
have
liquidations
enabled
for,
for
example,
usdc
tusd
volts.
We
don't
liquidate
those,
it's
just
pegged
to
a
fixed
oracle
price
of
one
dollar,
so
I
was
yeah.
I
was
curious
what
the
plans
would
be
for
that.
C
I
mean
this.
This
would
just
be
my
opinion,
but
I
would
suggest
you
probably
should
have
liquidations
because
there
isn't,
you
know
like
die,
there's
no
direct
redemption
mechanism,
so
you
know
the
peg
can
fluctuate
more.
You
know
more
widely
than
something
that
is,
you
know
directly
redeemable
like
usdc,
so
my
suggestion
would
be
probably
yes
but
but
yeah.
That's
a
bit
of
a
naughty
view.
I
guess.
D
B
D
A
C
Yeah,
so
we
do
have
binary
options,
but
the
the
mechanism
was
a
bit
problematic,
because
liquidity
in
secondary
markets
for
trading
options
was
too
low,
and
so
they
kind
of
fizzled
out.
So
we
are
working
on
a
program
to
try
and
reintroduce
a
better
version
of
binary
options
with
with
better
liquidity.
C
A
C
So
like
oracle
latency
on
l1
with
chain
link,
is
you
know,
I
mean
with
any
oracle.
Basically
is,
is
fairly
high,
so
the
the
deviation
thresholds
that
are
are
set.
Are
you
know,
kind
of
front
runnable?
If
you
are
watching
you
know
the
water
market,
and
so,
if
you
add
leverage
into
that,
it
just
becomes
more
problematic.
You
know
so.
We've
we've
gotten
to
a
point
now
where
we
have
like
a
speed
bump.
C
That
forces
you
to
kind
of
wait
six
minutes
and
and
get
the
price
if
the
price
updates
within
six
minutes
on
a
lot
of
these
assets,
which
has
kind
of
been
able
to
curtail
the
the
front-running
issue.
But
if
you
add
leverage
and
you
don't
increase
fees
or
increase
that
time,
it
just
creates
a
lot
more
risk,
whereas
on
you
know
optimistic
ethereum,
we
expect
to
have
some
second
article
updates
through
chain
links.
So
it's
going
to
be
much
much
better.
A
C
Yeah
everyone,
everyone
does
perps.
I
think
you
know
it's
a
it's
probably
an
issue
of
of
liquidity.
I
think
you
know
once
you
have
vanilla
futures,
then
you
know
you've
got
sort
of
expiry
dates
that
you
know
need
to
be
rolled
and-
and
I
think
my
guess
is
it'll
probably
come
on
l2.
I
think
once
we've
got
like
robust
l2
solutions,
it'll
come
but
yeah.
It's
it's
a
bit
challenging
on
that.
One.
B
Also
for
if
I
could
speak
to
that
sort
of
like
price
price
crash
question
right,
this
was
one
of
the
questions
that
I
had
immediately
when
I
was
looking
at
synthetics
and
it
took
me
a
while
to
kind
of
get
my
my
head
around
it.
But
if
you
look
at
this,
the
price
is
down
from,
I
think
a
high
of
28
dollars.
Along
with
you,
know
the
rest
of
the
market's
been
dumping.
B
But
you
can
see
that
right
because
of
that
a
lot
of
people
get
scared
a
lot
of
people
kind
of
stop
staking,
and
so
the
staking
yield
goes
way
up
like
last
week.
It
was
20,
it's
now
46
right,
so
you
can
see
this
sort
of
like
innate
kind
of
balancing
mechanism
that
the
lower
the
price
goes.
The
higher
the
incentive
to
stake
goes
right,
and
this
sort
of
provides
an
inherent
price
stability
that
I
think
is
like
really
nice
for
a
collateral
token.
A
B
B
B
If,
if
anyone
has
really
questions
also
I'd
say
joining
the
synthetic
discord
is
a
really
great
way.
It's
that's
like
one
of
the
the
best
communities
out
there
in
d5
right
there's
like
a
ton
of
people
who
are
just
out
to
like
answer
any
questions
you
have
like
share
their
knowledge.
Like
help,
you
learn
where
you
can
like
what
you
what
you
can
do
and
how
you
can
get
involved.
C
I
think
one
interesting
dynamic
that
I
would
expect
to
see
if
snx
was
able
to
be
used
as
collateral,
but
the
collateral
ratio
was
lower,
is
you
would
probably
see
a
scenario
where
people
would
be
locking
snx
outside
of
the
snex
ecosystem,
to
borrow
dye
to
sell
it
into
susd,
which
would
you
know
potentially
create
some
interesting
dynamics
in
terms
of
expanding
the
dye
supply?
You
know
at
the
at
the
time
when
it
was
needed,
which
I
think
you
know
again
could
be
quite
interesting
and.
C
Yeah
so
so
we've
had
an
srp
process
for
over
a
year.
Now
I
think,
maybe
18
months
and
anyone
can
ride
an
srp.
Anyone
can,
you
know,
propose
a
change
to
the
protocol.
That
sip
then
goes
to
the
spawn
council,
which
is
a
body
that's
directly
elected,
it's
like
a
representative
democracy,
directly
elected
by
token
holders,
and
they
vote
on
it
and
decide
whether
to
implement
that
sip.
C
D
C
D
C
Yeah
at
the
moment,
it
does
the
way
that
we're
going
to
constrain
that
in
the
future,
is
to
give
power
to
both
the
spartan
council
and
directly
to
token
holders
to
veto
a
change.
So
if
the
protocol
dow
attempted
to
make
a
change
that
was
outside
of
governance,
either
token
holders,
you
know
some
some
proportion
or
the
the
spartan
council
would
be
able
to
actually
block
that
change
from
being
made
on
chain.
C
C
Were
they
were
chosen
from
the
foundation,
but
now
the
protocol
dial
adds
new
members
themselves.
So
you
know,
if
there's
a
core
contributor
who
meets
certain
criteria,
they're
added
we're
actually
about
to
make
that
a
public
process
whereby
the
spartan
council
actually
adds
a
a
protocol
down
member
when
they
meet
specific
criteria.
The
reason
why
we
haven't
made
it
fully
public
to
date
is
just
opsec.
C
E
Oh
darn,
it
okay
yeah,
so
I
don't
know
if
someone
asked
us
already,
I
kind
of
got
distracted
for
a
bit.
So
when
you
guys
went
through
what
we
went
through
on
black
thursday,
how
did
you?
How
did
you
guys
handle
it?
I
mean
how
was
your
experience
and
the
second
part
of
my
question
is
with
regards
to
optimism
right,
the
community,
the
maker
communities
right
now
right
now
debating
whether
we
should
go
to
like
x
die
or,
what's
the
other,
I
can't
think
of
the
other
one.
E
But
what
was
the
thinking
behind
you
guys
choosing
to
go
with
optimism?
So
I
guess
the
first
part
is
you
know
black
thursday,
how
you
guys
handle
that?
How
was
your
experience
I
should
say-
or
maybe
there
wasn't,
that
much
leverage
at
that
time
and
the
second
one
would
be
yeah.
What
was
the
thinking
behind
going
with
optimism,
as
opposed
to
you
know
ex
die,
or
even
I
know
you
guys
wouldn't
go
to
finance
smart
chain,
but
you
know.
C
Zk
zk
roll
ups,
or
something
like
that,
so
so
yeah
on
on
the
black
thursday
question
at
the
time.
If
I
remember
correctly,
the
collateralization
ratio
was
700,
so
we
didn't
go
anywhere
near
that
200
liquidation
threshold.
I
think
it
was.
It
was
a
50
drawdown
which
was
kind
of
fine.
I
think
there
were
in
fact
no
liquidations
even
triggered
on
the
day.
There
were
some
issues.
Obviously
you
know
around
gas
price,
spikes
and
oracle
updates
getting
pushed
through
from
chain
link.
C
But
you
know,
within
the
synthetic
protocol
itself
there
were.
There
were
no
structural
issues
which
was
lucky.
You
know,
I
think,
had
it
been
a
little
bit
sharper
of
a
of
a
drawdown,
it
could
have
triggered
some
liquidations
and
we
would
have
seen
some
interesting
dynamics
at
play,
but
we
didn't,
we
didn't
quite
get
there,
because
that
buffer
was
so
high
on
optimism.
I've
got
a
blog
post
that
I
wrote
that
kind
of
goes
over.
C
My
personal
reasoning
around
why
we
did
that,
but
I
think
broadly,
what
we
were
looking
for
is
something
that
was
going
to
be
as
close
to
evm
compatible
as
possible,
something
that
we
can
port
over
fairly
easily
without
needing
to
maintain
two
separate
code
bases,
and
I
think
that's
what
we've
gotten.
So
you
know
we're
we're
actually,
on
the
the
pseudomainnet
now
running,
you
know
basically
the
the
exact
same
code,
there's
some
modifications
for
contract,
size
limits
and
some
op
codes
that
can't
be
used.
C
E
C
C
Yeah
yeah,
we
did
absolutely
yeah,
I
mean
a
long
time
ago-
probably
not
not
that
recently,
but
yeah.
We,
we
definitely
considered
xdi
or
some
other
side
chain
like
a
synthetic
specific
side
chain.
I
think
the
issue
for
us
was
that
you
know
those
side
chains,
particularly
back,
then
we're
not
going
to
be
able
to
give
you.
C
You
know
full
sort
of
exchange
functionality
that
we
have
on
our
one
now,
so
you
know
for
us,
it's
not
just
about
you,
know,
transfers
and
and
sort
of
simple
functions
like
there's
a
lot
of
complex
functionality
that
runs
on
l1
that
we
needed
to
be
able
to
run
on
whatever
scaling
solution
we
went
with,
which
is
why
you
know
optimistic
ethereum
was:
was
the
choice
for
us
over?
You
know
even
things
like
stock
or
whatever,
which
would
have
required.
You
know
significant
rewrites
could
go
back.
E
Right
specifically
that
if
you
say
you
rolled
up,
you
went
over
to,
I
don't
know,
let's
say:
let's
pick
solana
since
solana
is
starting
to
make
a
lot
of
moves.
If
you
did
roll
snx
to
solana,
I
mean
I
could
see.
I
guess
in
my
opinion,
people
minting
some
dye
taking
it
over
there
and
obviously
that's
a
win-win
for
both
of
us.
Is
that
something
that
you
guys
have
been
approached?
I
mean
I
don't
know
if
you
can
talk
about
it,
but
something
you
thought
about
looked
into.
C
Yes
yeah,
so
I
think
one
thing
that
it's
worth
pointing
out
is
that
I
don't
have
any
control
anymore
in
any
in
any
way
of
the
project
other
than
participating
in
in
the
spartan
council
governance
process.
So
my
personal
view
is
probably
fairly
fairly
east
centric.
You
know,
we've
we've
explored
a
number
of
other
chains.
C
You
know
again,
we've
been
around
for
a
long
time
as
well
as
make
right,
not
quite
as
long
but
you
know
going
back
to
2017,
and
you
know
we
looked
at
eos.
We've
looked
at,
you
know
a
lot
of
different
chains
and-
and
I
think
the
the
end
result
for
us
is
that
there's
nothing
currently
that
has
the
tooling
and
infrastructure
and
community
that
ethereum
has.
C
And
so
you
know,
my
big
focus
personally
is
is
on
trying
to
generate
social
coordination
around
moving
to
optimistic
ethereum,
because
I
think
that
that
process
of
running
some
stuff
on
l1
some
stuff
on
on
optimism
is
going
to
be
the
optimal
path
for
us
over
the
next
12
to
18
months
rather
than
trying
to
shift
onto
another
l1.
I
think
the
fragmentation
that
would
create
would
be
very
problematic
for
divi.
You
know
maker
us
the
lending
protocols,
all
of
it.
E
Yeah
that
makes
sense.
I
think
it
would
be
better
if
someone,
you
know,
would
just
mint
it
here
and
then,
if
these
guys
can
wrap
it
over
there,
then
that's
up
to
them.
Turning
back
the
clock
and
I've
been
following
synthetics
for
I
don't
know,
maybe
during
the
dog
days
when
you
know
it
was
cold
and
nobody
wanted
to
talk
about
any
of
this
stuff.
I
remember
you
had
a
podcast
one
time
came.
I
think
it
was
with
pat
shawn
nixie,
something
like
that.
E
I
can't
even
pronounce
his
name,
and
there
was
a
you
guys-
had
an
attack
back
then
at
the
early
stages,
where
you
had
a
guy
who,
I
guess
was
holding
ransom
and
you
got
over
that
you've
done
such
a
great
job
right
to
get
the
protocol
to
where
it's
at
right
now,
and
when
I
say
you,
I
don't
mean
you,
I
mean
you
specifically
but
the
entire
synthetics
community.
But
can
you
take
us
back
to
what
happened
at
that
time?
E
C
Yeah
I
appreciate
that
I
think
the
the
the
main
thing
was
it
was
an
attack.
You
know
we
were
running
our
own
proprietary
oracle
at
the
time,
and
you
know
that
was
a
big
driver
for
us
to
migrate
to
to
chain
lincoln.
You
know
hand
off
the
the
oracle
problem
to
another
project
which
you
know
we're
very
happy.
It's
it's
been
working
well
since
then.
I
think
you
know,
alongside
that.
Obviously,
we've
worked
to
really
improve
the
governance
process
and
and
decentralize
it
you
know
back.
C
Then
there
was
still
a
foundation.
It
was
still
very
centralized
and
hierarchical.
I
was
you
know,
I
guess
emotionally
in
charge
of
of
things,
but
you
know
since
then,
we've
really
tried
to
kind
of
distribute
the
ownership
of
the
protocol,
both
around
governance
and
and
you
know,
the
actual
network
itself
as
widely
as
possible,
and
so
you
know
we
now
have
like
like
maker.
You
know
various
experts
and
specialists
in
you
know
specific
aspects
of
the
protocol
that
have
a
far
deeper
understanding.
C
You
know
than
some
of
the
core
contributors
and-
and
I
think
that's
just
a
healthy
process
that
you
kind
of
have
to
go
through
and
that's
what
has
allowed
us
to
kind
of
get
to
this
point.
You
know
back
from
you
know
kind
of
going
from
there
when,
when
it
was
a
small
team
of
you
know,
10
people
or
whatever
to
you
know
today.
C
Yeah,
it's
not
really
a
sensitive
topic.
I
think
when
we
switched
to
when
we
switched
to
chain
link
maker
was
an
option,
but
the
the
latency
of
the
articles
was
even
longer
than
chain
link.
You
know,
I
think
the
articles
were
were
designed
for
a
very
specific
maker,
centric
purpose
and
because
of
the
way
that
the
deadpool
works
and
and
the
way
that
we
need,
you
know
fairly
fairly
low,
latency
oracle
updates.
A
D
Yeah
is
chain
link
charging,
synthetics
governance
for
their
oracles
or
they
are
yeah.
They
are
okay,
got
it
yeah,
it's
a
little.
The
oracle
thing's
a
bit
out
of
my
depth,
but
I
think
you
covered
it
quite
well.
It's
just
maker's
oracles
are
pretty
bespoke
for
maker
purposes,
so
figuring
out
that
overlap
would
be
good.
I
think
you
guys
probably
already
answered
that
in
the
mip.
Six,
though.
C
Yeah,
possibly
possibly
I
I
think
my
sense
is
that
you
know
it's
like
the
compound
articles
as
well.
Right,
like
you
know,
chain
link
even
realistically
chain
link
made
a
number
of
changes
for
us
specifically
for
synthetics.
You
know
in
those
early
days
that
I
think
have
kind
of
pushed
them
in
a
certain
direction.
So
I
think
you
know
there's
room
for
specific
implementations
of
you
know
of
oracles,
but
from
our
perspective
we
wanted
to
get
it
outside
the
protocol.
C
D
C
A
B
A
A
Showing
up
and
we'll
see
you
next
week,
we'll
actually
have
the
growth
core
unit,
explaining
what
they're
going
to
be
doing
so
we're
switching
a
little
bit
from
from
collateral
to
to
more
internal
politics,
where
we
can
ask
how
they
plan
to
grow
our
community.
More
so
see
you
guys
next
week
at
6,
00
pm
utc
have
a
nice
one.