Hey All,
I made an account on this forum just to contribute to this - because it seems several things are off here.
To be crystal clear - I am absolutely in favour of adding oracles, as that’s what’s healthiest for the protocol long term. But the way this is being approached is glaring with red flags.
I think the most important values we must return to with AMPL - is care, cautiousness, and deliberation when taking taking action. It is these values from the AMPL dev team that’s allowed AMPL to be a successful experiment thus far.
I do not see much of that care, cautiousness, and deliberateness in this proposal.
1) There’s zero detail I could find about implementation timeline and what alternatives were considered.
The proposal implies that we should just switch from a median of the 2 sources, immediately to a median of 3 sources. Why not a ramp as a function of time that allows AMPL to gradually ease in the data feed from Tellor? What about different parameters for that ramp function? Maybe it’s a ramp function combined with a step function? For something that’s supposedly been being worked on for a year, it seems like these are obvious things that would have and should have been considered if we want to preserve the health of AMPL.
2) There are unanswered technical concerns.
I’m not going to re-hash things that have already been said - but it seems like there’s still several open technical questions from the things raised above by @Fiddlekins @tsar_impersonator and ducc . Despite this, it appears the Tellor team went ahead to take a snapshot without fully addressing all of these concerns.
We need to understand that Ampl is just starting to enter it’s utility phase, we have a lot of interesting applications coming out that everyone is excited about. ANY CHANGE TO THE PROTOCOL AT THIS TIME ADDS ADDITIONAL RISK. Again, I am not against improvements, especially oracles. But if we are going to change anything with the protocol, we need to understand the risks and address all of them.
3) The signal snapshot doesn’t even contain an abstain option per the recommended guidelines.
I’m not sure if this was intentional or not, but I have not found a reasoning for it anywhere. The Tellor team has also largely been absent from the Discord and Telegram communities, although I understand they are coming to office hours/Amplitheater today. I’ve seen mentions of the Tellor proposal in the Discord here and there, but not enough discussion if at all. I don’t think this is problem of community either - because I’ve seen the community discuss the kAmpl news and announcements with more detail (granted those are not as large as impact to the protocol).
None of the above is meant to attack the Tellor team, and I hope it’s not perceived that way. I love the initiative they’re taking here to add an oracle; it’s certainly something we need. But it needs to be done in the correct way. The same way AMPL dev team is making sure to have all of our ducks in a row before proposing to add AMPL onto Aave as collateral. We should expect the same from teams wanting to change our own protocol.
I’m hoping the Tellor team can address these concerns, in additional to the technical concerns raised above during today’s Amplitheater.