Tried to engage the dev team on this for a month with no response. Would like an official answer now.
All code used is open sourced and the data is reproducible. I would specifically like the dev team to explain how their liquidator is doing these frontruns if they are an honest actor
This is not a great look for TFL in that there was seemingly no public announcement about this change when they initiated it and only came clean about once they were challenged.
How are the team going to do better in terms of transparency going forward?
I’m surprised that this hasn’t been addressed yet. It’s a bit over my head in technicality, but it hasn’t gotten much response from people either supporting the claim or denying it.
I think mostly people realized that by May/June, a lot of the selling pressure on Luna from Anchor liquidations at 30% premium has been avoided by the fact that TFL front ran the bids.
It’s far from ideal in terms of fair access to the Liquidation contract and transparency, but I don’t see evil intentions like the headline of this thread suggests.
This argument that a couple of million Luna sales crashed the price during a period of 3.872 BILLION USD in volume is ridiculous. The fact that it was officially used by Anchor Protocol, @dokwon and @ryanology045 to demonize decentralized liquidators is sad, but using the same false narrative to make unilateral, secret decisions that changes how the protocol fundamentally operates is frightening.
Decentralized liquidators also didn’t cause “cascading liquidation” because Anchor uses Band oracles which will ignore the tiny terraswap volume in favor of the massive CEX volume.
If you told me that a platform with 0.5x leverage caused cascading liquidations while FTX offered 100x leverage, I wouldn’t believe you without even looking at the data.