Decentralized + Automated buybacks to burn

#Fantom #Defi .


1.Are Alpacas decentralized or Centralized ?

Currently we’re 100% Centralized because all the revenue generated is controlled by the team. This is a risk that we governance holders take by risking our profits to be controlled by a central entity (team ). Currently we’re relying on q belief and trust based system.

2 .Is it possible to be financially decentralized (#Defi)


An example that I Know is boo Buyback and Reward system(pinned on their Twitter). There’s a code that has to be run into the chain that only does buyback and adds it into a single reward pool, the code is open to be run by anyone in only the direction it was built to run with in the layer 1 and no one can stop it coz no one runs the chain whether bsc/ftm/eth . .With this its possible to implement the Alpaca buy backs and burn and make Alpaca a #Defi . Since Boo buy back is only distributed to 1 wallet the same could be done for Alpaca that some % of accrued Revenue runs into the 00000 wallet. This has to be done manually to execute it only in that direction but is open to anyone and whoever does it is rewarded a micro % of the reward and this literally makes it automated because whoever does it will receive some reward %
Plus the core could still be doing it if we’re less of devs or Moon dev pacas will also be participating to see more Alpacas burning also moon aspirants a.ka WatchDogs like me (waiting for 99% burn) will learn how to do it and participate in burning more, and earning in the process.

The same way has a possibility to be used in rewards buy buyback and distribution to Alpaca governance stakers depending on number of Xalpaca held.
With this rewards will be distributed daily because of the participation of anyone in return for a small reward everytime he does it (basically making it Automated) an action is triggered by another action the rewards is open for anyone to participate and the longer it takes the more money it accrues and some of us wont be even after that money…i love seeing Alpaca burn and some chain fees are almost 0 gas fees so why not?.

As long as the Revenue generated is controlled you cannot call yourself a Defi. Maybe blockchain Finance but not Defi ,unless we implement something like this, we don’t have financial freedom.
Lastly to the core "If you have no intention in stealing from Alpacas or controlling and profiting from their funds or even creating some possible vulnerabilities like rug pulls and insider trading. Then why haven’t you implemented the basics of Defi?

In Summary
With decentralized manual buyback open to anyone to execute it and in return they receive some micro reward, making it an automated system because everyone in crypto wants Funds and if you delay to take it someone else does it .(binance #project bitcoin button). When blockchain is Centralized its more efficient than a non blockchain finance entity but based on real life laws,publicly open to everyone not anonymously. I need to know where we stand controlled or uncontrolled?

I like the questioning because I see it’s done on higher grounds, but I have no idea how much code is needed in order to automate all that. If it is something that would not take away Dev capacity while we are launching and improving our products, it will be a good idea to discuss it now, but if not, imho, we can also live a bit longer as we are.

1 Like

I’m ok with any time frame but thats the direction we should be heading

What you’ve described here is a very shallow understanding of decentralization. Decentralization is not binary. It exists on spectrums in multiple dimensions; There’s decentralization of multiple layers of decision-making, smart contracts, funds and future revenues, etc.

I guarantee that all the protocols you use are not fully decentralized in all dimensions, because it isn’t possible. Even in decentralized governance, you get clumps of cliques that form due to political maneuvering.

A crucial caveat that you missed in your argument is that the ALPACA team controls revenues for only 0-7 days until they are distributed every week. We’ve had $1 billion USD in our platform for over a year, $100 million in revenue, and have been distributing revenues to users for most of that time. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.

So the answer as to why we haven’t implemented this is that the ROI on this is very low compared to other things the team can be working on. We are building products that generate new revenue, instead of giving away user revenue to some keepers that are enforcing something that doesn’t need to be enforced, given the history and track record. Our goal is to build value, not to win some non-existent decentralization award.

If we were some brand new protocol with an anonymous team with no track record then such a suggestion might be more useful, but given the risk is so low and the stakes are so low, it comes down to the ROI being too low to eliminate this.


I agree with you partly ,but to make the protocol revenue flow independent of a Centralized entity is of importance too. If its possible on chain why not ? Its not about time frame i never stated it but its a thing to consider so that the protocol works and rewards Alpacas on its own while you guys keep building other things. Exactly like Spooky Didi it.

Once the Manual buyback & burn is implemented, for instance lets say the one who executes the burn earns 0.5% of total pool…thats like 50$ in 1000$…plus it being open to anyone to participate thats a very small amount to be saying giving out plus more devs and learners will be fighting to participate or else someone earns it solely. With this it will obviously reduce the risk that we take on trust alone. Therefore the TVL and market cap may rise higher. Thats why Eth has 350B$ Market cap and other projects within it with over 1B$.
On matters of past behavior people dont have to take such a risk coz rugpulls arent done by people known of past behavior it just happens suddenly and un announced and jt happened because they had the power to pull it. Which is something that may be possible to prevent on chain

I just told you why not–the ROI isn’t good enough. Doing something just because someone else did is rarely a good reason.

If you ran a business and spent 1 month polishing the sign at the front of the shop because you believed in the importance of quality presentation, you’d soon be bankrupt.


I agree you cant copy everything but since this is blockchain and new things are discovered frequently its evolving so i wouldn’t call it copying but basics of #Defi.
If its possible i dont see why not. Just like the way proof of work chains cant be stopped its almost similar by using humans as executors and rewarding them is also of importance almost just like mining. It doesn’t have to be implemented asap but it should be a consideration. This is if Alpaca isnt meant to be just in our lifetime or have a possibility to be pulled down instantly

If a business next door shows how to handle revenue better i think i would consider. Plus it increases trust, reduces risks and removes centrality on the huge pie the protocol generates. If its possible thats how it should be…ofcourse it will take time to implement and certify its safety but thats one of the most important things to consider coz alpaca since it started has always went down in price and the weekly burns seem to be barely doing nothing. So why not leave that job to the chain and build other things and solve it once and for all. No matter what time it may take but the protocol revenue to be decentralized.

1 Like

i agree with you… why alpaca team keep delaying it

Delaying what, we never decided to do this. All points regarding why not are clearly explained in this thread.

This is an open forum so anyone is free to disagree on this or anything, but at the end of the day, you need sufficient support to push through a proposal. In my personal opinion, most people on this forum are rational enough to see why doing this will not have a good ROI and will be a waste of the dev team’s resources.