@ColonelSanders, thanks for bringing this up. There is some debate in another thread about the emergency use of the Anchor community funds in this capacity as well. @Kamil originally suggested we authorize the Anchor community funds as a backstop. I think there is broad agreement with the proposal’s goal (protect reserves), but some expressed concern around the “extreme” nature of selling the community pool. @ryanology045 suggested that we wait, observe and re-assess when reserves reach $3 million UST.
I think it is critical that in the short term, we buttress yield reserves (my suggestion has been that we should operate with at least 12 months of reserves; more discussion on this topic in another thread). I am open to all options on achieving this–ANC community funds, LUNA community funds–and I continue to be of the view that we should move expeditiously. You want backstops in place before the storm.
Note, however, that we are treating the symptom here and not the disease. Aside from some of the structural issues we have uncovered through the recent volatility, the protocol operates with negative unit economics because of the lack of a compelling borrower value proposition. Welcome everyone to add their ideas for fixing this in this thread.