Discussion Thread: Remove/Reduce Impact of Gauge Weight

As a Curve user, the thing that really turned me off hugely on curve was the gauge weight systems.

Having your APY jerked around by whales week to week (or being forced to change pools to chase yield), plus having to vote on gauge weights constantly and associated fees.

Basically, I really loathe the gauge weight system and I think its dumb.

There is some validity to the idea that inviting massive whales to come in, buy the token, and vote their pools is worth it in the long run for token price, but from a user experience standpoint both as an LP or as a trader, it’s sub-optimal. an LP is getting wildly unpredictable APYs, a trader is NOT getting as little slippage as they would because the liquidity is inefficiently being placed elsewhere because whales votes for it.

I’d like to open a discussion thread about whether or not there’s community support for getting rid of gauge weights (or reducing their impact) - and also of the technical feasibility of doing so (the explanation I got on curve from michwill implied that this would be difficult be not impossible).

Thoughts?

1 Like

I do not like the gauge weight system either but unfortunately I see no alternative yet.

As Swerve evolves we need a way to incentivize specific pools to either get an edge over other AMM or to penalize players trying to game the system.

As suboptimal as the gauge weight system is it is pretty laissez-faire.

I do not hold strong opinion on it, though, and am open to other perspectives.

2 Likes

Yeah i also hate the curve gauge system, i think it needs a serious look at before any new pools are added.

Some options that would be better than the curve system would be having gauge weight = pool tvl/total tvl (so all the pools are the same). Or having dao votes to change the parameters of each pool rather than having weekly updates to force changes.

What has happened on curve with the hbtc pool is stupid.

1 Like

Agree to having dao votes to change the parameters makes more sense than the gauge weight system.

Maybe there is something we can do purely on the UI front that would be effective re: gauge weights. Although I guess that would end up with whales voting by directly interacting with smart contracts and nobody else does, which would be bad.

Some insight from a dev who understands what is possible or not re: limiting the gauge weights would be immensely helpful. My understanding is that even if we wanted to change it, it could be practically difficult to do so.

What if we keep the gauge weight system but make the voting cycles like a month or two? This way we keep the governmental value of the token and have a relatively stable APY for a longer period of time.

2 Likes

This is an interesting idea . Might be the easiest 80/20 option right now to resolve a big source of frustration that users have with curve that also doesn’t require a major overhaul on the code side (I assume).

1 Like

One possible idea is to probably limit the abruptness of the gauge-weight changes by phasing it out. If a whale assigns X gauge weight to a certain pool to sway, and if the difference is going to be over a set X % limit, then instead of an immediately effective gauge-weight and reward change, it could do so gradually.

We will have to check the technical feasibility of this mechanism. I believe, such a mechanism can prevent the downside of having gauge-wars and deter opportunistic mining, while still preserving the function of gauge-weight votes.

1 Like

I prefer simple as well and did not like always having to switch my stake to a different Curve pool. However I think it’s best to focus on just the most important developments that need to be done and then get to the more debatable ones. We have limited dev efforts and they must be used optimally.

2 Likes