Hello, I’m Manuel Andrés Muñoz, a community moderator for the past two years and a member of the GoodDollar community since its early days. Back then, many things were new, such as the idea of a basic income, which was just being considered due to the global crisis. Basic income started to be seen as an option to provide security to the most vulnerable. Additionally, we were on the brink of a bullish rally in the crypto market, and within the community, we exchanged goods and services for G$, assigning it the value we deemed fit. At that time, the value of G$ was speculative, but it was also when speculation was at its lowest because we all reached a balance between supply and demand for G$ for use within the Facebook community.
Through this process of price discovery and protocol understanding, I became deeply interested in the GoodDollar protocol. Witnessing the potential to generate genuine aid through people willing to donate their yields via yield farming initially blew my mind. However, this was just the first instance of my thinking being challenged. I initially questioned whether increased circulation of G$ would diminish its value. It seemed like common sense at the time, until I grasped two key concepts. First, the protocol leveraged supply and demand to ensure that as the maximum supply approached its limit, the price would also increase. I began to see GoodDollar not only as a means to distribute money to all, akin to UBI, but also as a tool for inclusion in the blockchain sector. Understanding that a token’s value lies not only in its price but also in its circulation and utility within various communities reshaped my perspective. This realization elevated the value of G$ beyond its USD equivalent. It was a moment of cognitive reconfiguration.
With this understanding in mind, I believe we have a better context for why I propose/share my thoughts.
Firstly, I consider establishing a plan to restore G$ issuance a high priority. The current supply may prove insufficient, particularly if the reorganization of G$ issuance takes longer than expected.
Secondly, I emphasize the importance of not selling any assets mentioned in the post. For instance, Fuse currently appears undervalued in the market. Selling assets prematurely risks missing out on potential gains during a bullish market. If such a decision is considered, it should only proceed after careful analysis to ensure that the benefits outweigh the opportunity costs.
Thirdly, addressing the negative impact of the exploit on the protocol is crucial. It’s essential to create strategies to reactivate liquidity within the protocol. Currently, price fluctuations due to low liquidity exacerbate uncertainty, especially from a community moderation standpoint.
Moving forward, I suggest:
-
Establishing a multi-token, multi-chain reserve primarily comprising low-risk assets with a smaller portion allocated to higher-risk tokens. These tokens should pay a fee for inclusion in the reserve and be authorized by the DAO.
-
Creating a distributed reserve to facilitate integration with additional chains. Despite the community’s imperative to exchange G$, its Ethereum-centric nature limits accessibility due to high gas costs.
-
Seeking liquidity from sponsors. While this has been explored previously, it needs to occur more frequently. Collaboration with major businesses to accept G$ at a fixed price in their stores could expand its utility and demand, thus increasing its value. Such collaborations can bolster protocol liquidity, as seen with Celo’s subsidies to Good Labs for GoodDollar development.
I believe the DAO should endeavor to attract liquidity through initiatives such as activating staking with the approved 5% annual yield in V3 and exploring everyday use cases for GoodDollar. This brainstorming should involve community spaces with support from GoodDollar ambassadors, hence my organization of a community space for discussion on February 10
Lastly, I propose seeking assistance from eToro, GoodDollar’s most significant sponsor and a key player throughout the protocol’s journey. While their contributions are appreciated, addressing liquidity drain issues directly through eToro seems the most viable solution.
While my suggestions may not hold all the answers, I believe they serve as a solid foundation for discussion and potential improvement in the future.
