Hello everyone, first-time poster, long time fan (and friend of Regen, leading the ecosystem fund Cerulean Ventures with Matthew Stotts).
This proposal, if passed, will add REGEN to the Regen Ecocredit Marketplace allow list, adding it as one of the many currency options in which buyers/sellers may transact.
Per the guidelines of Proposal 13,
Is the token in question a currency?
Is the token in question IBC-compatible?
Is the token in question liquid, stable and safe to use?
Does the token support a good onboarding experience for non crypto natives?
REGEN is of course IBC-compatible, stable, safe to use, and has a decent onboarding experience supported by Keplr and other wallets in the Cosmos ecosystem.
Furthermore, adding REGEN to the allowlist will provide additional utility to holding REGEN. Using REGEN to transact in the marketplace, purchase and retire credits will drive adoption of REGEN. This will also allow the protocol and Regen community itself to purchase eco-credits, should the Regen community decide this is something they want to do.
A YES result on proposal will add REGEN to the allow list, represented by the denom:
Having REGEN the token added to this makes complete sense. It is like what the OSMO token is to Osmosis or the CRE and bCRE to Crescent. The only concern maybe is with the point of ‘is it liquid’ - at the moment there are tokens in circulation however volume is limited BUT then again i think opening up REGEN as a currency to be used on the marketplace will open it up to being more than just a governance token etc.
While REGEN currently doesn’t perfectly fit the four outlined criteria, I believe this proposal creates a great use case to actually make REGEN fit them better in the future by driving wider adoption and token use.
In addition, proposal 13 also outlined ethical alignment and synergy with ecocredits or other ecological asset types as additional criteria for such selection - here REGEN has a perfect match.
I am in favour of this proposal.
I think it’s important to be able to buy eco credits with regen to work towards the community being able to build a protocol/community owned treasury of eco credit assets, potentially being able to use community funds to buy forward contracts etc. I think that liquidity issues and short term dumping need to be solved through making regen more and more useful, not trying to protect its value by restricting utility.
I am in favor of the proposal.
I am PERSONALLY (not speaking on behalf of RND INC) excited about being able to bring credits that I own and sell them for Regen. @Regenerati Bonobo brings up an interesting idea about some of the opportunities that are opened up for the larger community to support projects and buy certain classes of credits and engage in community managed inventory and liquidity provision for eco credits. I think it’s clear we have some liquidity challenges and are in a crypto bear market causing price depression: but I dont think we should solve that by restricting utility of $regen tokens. The question is really whether or not we want to consider $regen a currency. I think there is a strong case based on our decentralization, (highest nakamoto coefficient in cosmos according to @chris / chainflow). ATOM is broadly considered a currency now (and I think should also be added to the allow list). Regen currently has the same token economics as the ATOM, and Regen has a better nakamoto coefficient but much lower value and liquidity.
Everything we are doing in this space, a co-creation of systems focused on ecological generation, is experimentation, backed with intentions and educated guesses.
No one knows what the market will decide, or what products/strategies will emerge, we can only guess.
I imagine that most sellers will want a stable ask price.
If markets tank, big buying opportunity to swoop up EcoCredits at a discount. If markets surge, Regen priced EcoCredits get expensive. Ha, who’s got their EcoCredit arb’n bots ready? Do we want to introduce the potential for synthetic trading?
If sellers wish to expose their asks to market volatility, that’s their prerogative.
If there was a way that EcoCredit value could derive an added premium from the upside value of Regen, I think that would be a more interesting mechanism. If EcoCredit holders could also earn some kind of dividend, like a staking yield, on the health of the Regen ecosystem and the Health of Ecosystems at large.
Anyhow, I am not against the proposal. The market will decide. Let’s try it!
Also, gas fees, at least for now, will need to be paid in Regen, so only one tx needed to top up with Regen to make that quick buy.
REGEN would be very intuitive to have in the Currency Allowlist. It would simplify the ecocredit user experience for REGEN governance community members, which represents the protocol’s deepest contributors. I believe that the opportunity to strengthen the token utility and grow the ecological benefits economy outweighs the risks at this juncture.
I realize there are some interesting corner cases around price volatility, but all in all, it makes sense to me that the native token (and ATOM, to be honest) is added to the list. Even just for the simplicity of only having to have one token when buying (instead of having to have REGEN for fees and USDC for the purchase).
And like others have said, it feels intuitive to web3 people to transact in the native chain token (we do this almost everywhere else too).
