Fantastic idea

This looks good! As well as the ZIL assets I think it would be good to have USDT/USDC and USDT/BUSD pairs listed. According to Devel's data presented in the last proposal the USDC/BUSD pair does ok without the LP incentives, so I don't think we would need them for these pairs either. USDT looks like it will be the default stablecoin of the ZIL ecosystem for now, and whatever you think of Tether's practices it is still very widely used on the ETH chain.

I am on board with this listing. Would we support both tokens? Soul has an ERC-20 and a NEP-5

Since now SWTH/USDC is 50-50 same as SWTH/BUSD 50-50: Should remove rewards from SWTH/BUSD and add that to SWTH/USDC - Total 24 Boost (Those coming from BUSD to buy SWTH have the USDC/BUSD pair). OR Make SWTH/USDC and SWTH/BUSD equal boost of 12 each. Having different weight for 50 SWTH - USDC 50 and 50 SWTH - BUSDC 50 makes no sense since both are 50-50 and essentially stable coin.

@newton I think it's a great idea for the team to colab with other worthy projects.

These are a good start. I'd also like to suggest adding bep-20 1inch/BUSD and erc-20 1INCH/USDC pairs next week if possible, since we've got 2 people willing to fund proposals and initial LP's.

Volume since the proposal passed. I've added the relative triangular share (relative to total share). I execluded future markets, due to that the sum of total share is not 100%. # Market Volume Total Share Rel. Tri. Share Liquidity Cur. Boost 1 eth1_usdc1 $5,797,117.93 16.6729% 28.4846% $251,068 8 2 swth_usdc1 $5,602,152.92 16.1121% 16.7492% $1.21m 18 3 swth_busd1 $3,241,817.65 9.3237% 18.0958% $213,667 8 4 swth_eth1 $2,371,613.74 6.8209% 38.8751% $393,117 18 5 busd1_usdc1 $2,300,426.18 6.6162% 44.1460% $519,272 3 6 bnb1_busd1 $2,017,762.76 5.8032% 15.8395% $118,670 6 7 nneo2_busd1 $1,974,220.26 5.6780% 16.9223% $130,405 4 8 wbtc1_usdc1 $1,355,299.41 3.8979% 47.8987% $249,731 7 9 nneo2_eth1 $1,205,559.14 3.4673% 31.7546% $122,388 4 10 eth1_wbtc1 $834,110.82 2.3990% 67.7240% $377,011 4 11 bnb1_eth1 $787,506.97 2.2649% 40.6574% $87,114 6 12 nneo2_usdc1 $766,435.07 2.2043% 33.9907% $52,784 2 13 cel1_busd1 $704,025.30 2.0248% 38.7616% $138,568 3 14 btcb1_busd1 $580,330.33 1.6691% 16.3458% $65,244 4 15 cel_eth $453,276.16 1.3037% 60.2875% $46,259 2 16 cel1_usdc1 $452,672.93 1.3019% 35.1293% $63,449 2 17 wbtc1_btcb1 $220,467.96 0.6341% 42.9432% $159,721 1 18 nex1_usdc1 $21,624.64 0.0622% 0.0000% $2,895.54 0 Edit: Added Liquidity and current pool weights

I like the idea in its essence. Some open questions: How does it scale to > 23 validators? (e.g. How does this look like with 100 validators?) Ideally it should work nicely even if max validator num is voted to be larger or smaller by using scaled values, rather than using hard-coded numbers. In terms of implementation - what is needed? Has the cosmos-sdk codebase that is relevant to this (see x/distribution module) been looked at? Core devs only has time to do so after Stargate. If we have consensus on the idea, ideally the patch can be funded by SDF too.

@Juanito - Hi, Unfortunately, the proposal claimed from the SDF the exact number of tokens required to fulfil the unswapped users claims, so there are no additional tokens to distribute. As we have told others, if you can rally others who haven't claimed the procedure can be repeated, so long as somebody is prepared to do the legwork to make it happen via a proposal etc.