“i am once again asking you to consider a yfi split”
i love everything about woofy (the brand, the experiment, the elegance, the immaculate conception), and i think it was the best a/b test yearn could ever run in favor of a yfi split. i’d argue the extraordinary market reception to woofy was as good of evidence as we will ever get that unit bias artificially limits the size of the yearn community. unfortunately woofy doesn’t and probably can’t go far enough on its own, at least not in a reasonable time frame in a competitive market for mindshare/talent.
a split has been discussed before and voted down at least once, but i’d like to relitigate in light of vany’s tweet yesterday:
the evidence for the correlation between tokenomics & trading ratios is speculative at best. but the evidence around unit bias is multi-decade (multi-century?) and undeniable. the research spans crypto, stocks, and the pricing of every day goods. do any of us deny its importance?
as one of the least giga-brain people here i feel like it’s my duty to point out when the community might be unnecessarily shooting itself in the foot with normies. and like the (now sunset) 30k cap, yfi’s high token price is a near sacred meme here. on that basis alone it probably deserves to be seriously reconsidered.
like a fish in water, the real king memes are the ones nobody even notices. i’d argue the high nominal price is not a meme that binds the community together, but one that artificially limits the size of the community. this i believe is critical - not because of the eth trading ratio, which will eventually take care of itself - but because the size of the yearn community is the top of the builder funnel. lets not let humans’ subconscious biases steer them away from yearn towards lesser projects. they need yearn and we need all the bodies we can get sers!
do you support a yfi split?