Fair Migration of Future BSL Token

Proposal Discussion
1

Proposal for Fair Migration of BSL Token from Ethereum to Hedera

Please note that this is applicable to any future-state migration

Introduction:

As the BSL token community seeks to migrate from Ethereum to Hedera, it is crucial to ensure a fair and equitable transition for all token holders involved. The proposed migration strategy aims to take into account the market capitalization ratios of BSL on Ethereum and Hedera during a specified snapshot in time. This method ensures that each user’s migration is proportional to their contribution to the overall BSL ecosystem and that holders don’t get dumped on by a migration in the event one side has a significantly lower price.

Background:

Ethereum and Hedera both host 7.5 billion BSL tokens, making them equally viable options for BSL token holders. However, the decision to migrate is driven by the desire to leverage the advantages offered by the Hedera platform, especially the existing liquidity pool. To address the unique circumstances of this migration, we propose a market cap-based approach that considers the relative value of BSL on both platforms.

Migration Calculation:

  1. Snapshot Time:
  • The migration process will initiate with a snapshot of the market capitalization of BSL on both Ethereum and Hedera at a predefined time. This snapshot will serve as the baseline for determining the proportional allocation of BSL tokens during the migration.
  1. Total BSL Ecosystem Market Cap:
  • The total market cap of the BSL ecosystem will be calculated by summing the market caps of BSL on Ethereum and Hedera. In the example given, if Ethereum BSL has a market cap of 10 million, and Hedera BSL has a market cap of 40 million, the total BSL ecosystem market cap would be 50 million.
  1. Percentage Contribution:
  • The percentage contribution of each platform to the total BSL ecosystem market cap will be determined. Continuing with the example, Ethereum BSL’s contribution would be 20% (10 million / 50 million), while Hedera BSL’s contribution would be 80%.
  1. Token Allocation:
  • Users migrating from Ethereum to Hedera will receive BSL tokens on Hedera proportional to their platform’s contribution to the total market cap. In the given example, Ethereum users would receive 20% of their current holdings during the migration. Tokens lost in would be burned during the migration process. In turn…if Ethereum users had 20% more market cap then they would receive +20% of their current holdings.

Rationale:

This market cap-based approach ensures fairness by recognizing and valuing the existing contributions of BSL holders on both Ethereum and Hedera. Unlike previous migrations where a new liquidity pool was established, this method acknowledges the presence of an already-established pool on Hedera. By aligning token allocations with market cap ratios, we aim to maintain a balanced representation of BSL holders in the Hedera ecosystem.

Implementation Plan:

  1. Communication:
  • A comprehensive communication plan will be implemented to inform the BSL community about the migration process, the rationale behind the market cap-based approach, and the snapshot timing.
  1. Snapshot Execution:
  • The snapshot of BSL market caps on both Ethereum and Hedera will be executed with transparency and precision at the specified time.
  1. Migration Process:
  • A seamless and user-friendly migration process will be established to facilitate the transition for BSL holders, ensuring that they receive their allocated tokens on Hedera accurately.
  1. Post-Migration Support:
  • A dedicated support system will be in place to address any queries or concerns from BSL token holders during and after the migration process.

Conclusion:

This proposal lays out a methodical and fair approach for migrating the BSL token from Ethereum to Hedera based on market cap ratios. By adopting this approach, we aim to uphold transparency, equity, and user satisfaction throughout the migration process, fostering a positive transition to the Hedera platform.

2 Likes
2

Agree. This is how it should be done whether ethereum or hedera has the larger share of marketcap. 1 BSL = 1 BSL from a project benefit standpoint but not to existing liquidity pools and token prices.

Hope this is passed to safeguard investors for future initiatives.

3

So you want to “punish” the holders that hold tokens on the chain that is performing less good then the other? 1 BSL = 1 BSL because the power it holds is within the ecosystem. Outside factors, like it being on different chains or having different prices, do not matter for that.

For example:

  • less staking rewards. Because you decided to buy on the less performing chain. sucks to be you.
  • less voting power. Because you decided to buy on the less performing chain. sucks to be you.

This is not a competition.

9 Likes
4

It is not punishment. It’s fair distribution of assets. The $ worth of someone’s portfolio will remain unchanged with this proposal. The same is applicable to hedera holders if ethereum is worth more.

5

it is not about the price in your portfolio. it is the strength you hold within the ecosystem

6 Likes
6

this is not right, totally disagree, it should be a fair 1:1 migration, eth bsl holders should not be punished, we have been holding longer.

9 Likes
8

I believe it should be 1:1 like it has been. Both ETH and now hedera should be equal when migrating so you get 1:1. This benefits all holders is my belief.

9 Likes
10

Let’s say ethereum BSL is 20% more per token than hedera BSL and we vote to migrate to hedera. Are you still going to agree with the 1:1? In this case ethereum holders will lose 20% of their portfolio worth

1 Like
12

Yes 100% that is the right way to go. It should be a 1:1 ratio regardless of price or MC.

4 Likes
13

For me if its not 1:1 im against it. The ecosystem works in a diferent way.

7 Likes
14

Yes I am, since I believe it should be 1:1 no matter price

6 Likes
15

yes since its 1 on 1. it has always been this ways.

5 Likes
16

It should be based on % and MC and not 1:1 albeit I have a huge bag that I would love to carry over. It just doesn’t seem right and could potentially lead to abuse with the arbitrage in prices. Hell that may be currently underway, which I don’t necessarily feel is healthy for the short term.

1 Like
17

I have been DCA’ing for 3 years now into both sides. It should be 1:1. Just like the purchase opportunity before it moved to Hbar, a lot of Hbar holders purchased the Bnb side moving the price drastically before migration. The pricing would equalize anyway before migration then.

4 Likes
18

i would vote against it since its not what bsl stands for.

2 Likes
19

This is so true!! It must be 1 on 1.

3 Likes
20

the remaining of the migrated tokens to the hedera side would be boughten up so fast, just look at the volume on the hedera side. Prices would stabilize quickly and then continue to climb. Besides its not about price its about voting weight, 1bsl = 1bsl and its also about what’s best for Banksocial.

4 Likes
21

I agree with you on this.

Among reasons I bought in on BSL is the 1:1 philosophy. The point on where value of each BSL token is equally compared to the other at a rate of 1:1 is important to me. Every voice has equal value.

6 Likes
23

1 bsc BSL = 1 eth BSL = 1 hts BSL is what was promised to everyone who bought into this project.

Changing that now would tear this project apart.

3 Likes
24

1 bsc BSL = 1 eth BSL = 1 hts BSL. This is the only way that would be fair.

4 Likes