Two token setup for Neutrino Protocol

So far we have tried out two tokenomics to run neutrino:

-NSBTs working as a bond with a sole purpose to restore USDN collateral and

-NSBTs working as a governance token, a tool to rebalance USDN supply and a revenue sharing token all in one

Both approaches were not sufficient to answer to all our needs:

-Past bond model can’t provide us with any reliable and predictible form of governance or protocol’s revenue sharing system

-Current system is unable to recapitalise reserves and ensure USDN market stability

I believe the solution to all our problems is to have the two above mentioned systems working together side by side and using two separate token mechanics:

-Bond feature should be handled by new recapitalization tokens that would be issued for Waves every time BR falls under 100% without any liquidity limitations and redeemed for USDN when BR is restored. In addition they should be non transferable just like gNSBT is now to force people to actually issue them and help the system rather than speculate on their value through the market.

-That being said current NSBT mechanics also work great and we still need them to govern the protocol through voting and to share protocol revenue. Moon factor, overall scarcity, unstaking fees are all great features that prevent bad actors from gaining too much control over Neutrino protocol and therefore should be kept and not changed.

I conclusion in my opinion we need Neutrino to have two legs in order to stand on it’s own. Don’t throw the baby with the water: let’s keep what is working now (NSBT) and add what we know worked in the past (BONDS) and let’s conquer the world together