Thank you for the detailed report on the current state of dYdX! Good points to start discussions!
About the Validator Set
-
Reducing the number of validators to 30 could alleviate the load on consensus mechanisms, thereby enhancing the UX for traders. Hyperliquid achieves its superior UX by operating with just 4 validators. Currently, there is virtually no demand from traders for greater decentralization, so this suggestion is intriguing in terms of improving product quality.
-
However, it’s also important to recognize that this perspective largely aligns with the interests of the top 30 validators, so the community should consider this proposal with a balanced and careful approach.
About Tokenomics
-
Liquidity is the most crucial aspect for traders, making it reasonable to allocate half of the revenue towards enhancing liquidity. Simply distributing 100% of revenue to stakers, as is currently done, does not unfortunately result in increased liquidity.
-
Furthermore, adopting a model similar to BNB, where the Treasury SubDAO executes buybacks and burns for revenue that exceeds a certain threshold, could provide a more transparent and effective way to enhance the value of the dYdX token.
-
Reducing the traders’ rebate fees would be beneficial, as it would decrease the amount of dYdX being released into the market.
About the Bridge
- Pausing the bridge at a certain point would be a good strategic move. However, as noted by @cryptoplaza , it is wise to retain some flexibility for manual adjustments.