Limbo Dev Update part 2 of 2: Pyrotokens
The cause for deflation
The most difficult concept to grasp in economics is the seemingly simple process of monetary inflation.
Inflation doesn’t just undermine our savings; it warps our culture.
There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose — John Maynard Keynes.
Inflation doesn’t just affect our policies; it dominates our politics.
“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws.” — Mayer Anselm Rothschild
The reason Bitcoin exists and the reason EIP1559 burns a base fee is because there’s a widespread belief in the cryptocurrency community that inflation’s opposite — deflation — would undo and overturn the subtle evils of inflation, that all the hidden forces would be laid bare and that our cultural desire to save, to HODL, would bleed away inequality faster than class-warfare-promoting-early-morning-talking-heads can pontificate.
This goes beyond the narrower cause of DeFi which is to decentralize and democratize the means of finance. A truly deflationary economy doesn’t require yield. Yet the sorcerers of Ethereum have shown us that we need not choose between finance and deflation and that even your Bitcoin can earn a yield. The first rule of economics is that there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Yet traditional centralized finance has stolen so much of our existing lunch that when DeFi liberates just a small percentage of it, we experience these hard to explain bounties that seem too good to be true. Scams and rugpulls aside, DeFi is a big sign pointing to a secret fridge full of lunch not one man in a million knew about.
When money is inflated, wealth is redistributed from existing holders to the first recipients of the new money. This is known as the Cantillon Effect. When money is deflated, wealth flows to existing holders from traders and borrowers.
This reverse Cantillon Effect is the basis of everything in Behodler and the ecosystem of dapps built around it. In Ethereum, the financial elite express themselves through the tools of miner extracted value (MEV). By controlling the order of transactions, the wealthy (who own the means of block production) can arbitrarily extract value from everyone else in the exact same way that a time traveller can go back and buy the exact right combination of stock undermining honest time-bound traders. Behodler is designed to drive a wedge into the machinery of MEV and redistribute value back to the participants in Behodler. Behodler creates deflationary redistribution to hodlers through a process known as MEV capture. This article explains how that works and why Pyrotokens are the final pillar necessary to lock in MEV capture.
Structure of this article
This final instalment in theoretical Limbo updates brings together all the cryptoeconomics of Behodler into one cohesive system by explaining the remaining piece of the puzzle: Pyrotokens. In order to build up to that, the next section explains briefly how constant function AMMs such as Uniswap work. This is then used to explain what Scarcity is from a broad AMM point of view which allows us to understand exactly what automining is and why burning SCX leads to more liquidity in Behodler. From here the foundation is set to introduce Pyrotokens, first by explaining the mechanism of minting and redeeming and then by showing how they super charge automining. Along the way, some reasonable questions are answered about how value in Pyrotokens accrues so that holders know exactly how to maximize their value. Finally, Limbo is reintroduced as a catalyst for this process and we see the role that Limbo and Flan play in not only introducing new tokens to Behodler but in deepening existing liquidity. In doing so, the entire value loop of Behodler is closed. Grab a snack and your favourite mind altering substance because this will require some focus but it will be worth the effort.
An automated market maker (AMM) is a contract that maintains a composition of tokens to facilitate instant swapping. The constant function market maker (CFMM) family popularized by Uniswap is a portfolio of tokens designed to always maintain a 50% split in value between its two composite tokens. The contract does this by calculating K in the formula xy=K where x and y are the starting balances for the tokens X and Y. If a trader wants to withdraw some portion of X, they must supply some portion of Y such that at the end of the swap, xy gives the same K value as before.
The bigger the initial values of x and y relative to the incoming trade, the less the price is affected. Another way of saying this is that the higher the values x and y, the higher the liquidity for a given trade.
If k increases after each trade instead of returning to its pre-trade value then liquidity increases. One major goal of a CFMM is to increase K after each trade. The way they all do this is through trading fees. For Uniswap, 0.3% of one of the tokens is held back so that
k_after > k_before
For instance, suppose we have a pair of tokens, Woodsman (WM) and Shan (AUS). The pair currently has 100 WM and 25 AUS. The value of K is
K=100x25 = 2500
Someone with 25 WM wants to buy AUS. They deposit 25. The formula requires K remain 2500 so
125xA = 2500
=> A = 20
This means after the trade the pair will now contain (125WM;20AUS). The trader received 5 AUS. Now if the goal is to raise liquidity, then let’s charge 1% on incoming tokens. The trader sends in 25 WM. 1% is removed from the trade, leaving 24.75. To get K= 2500, we have
=>A = 20.04008016
The trader now only receives 4.96 AUS.
Since the 1% remains in the token pair, the new value for K is:
K=125*20.4 = 2550
K has increased which means liquidity for the next trade has increased.
Scarcity is tokenized K
Since more Scarcity is minted as more tokens are added to Behodler because of the bonding curve dynamic and since SCX is the medium of swap exchange, it’s fairly accurate to think of SCX as tokenized K. The implicit goal of Uniswap is to achieve a larger value of K which they do via fees. Behodler’s explicit goal is to simply have the price of SCX rise to achieve the same effect.
Price tilting and Automining
One of the implications of modern AMM design is that the lower the balance of a token in an AMM relative to other tokens, the higher its price. You can calculate the spot price by just dividing the balances. For instance, if a token pair has 200,000 DAI and 100 ETH then the spot price of 1 ETH is worth 2000 DAI. This applies to all CFMMs as well as Behodler. So if we have a token pair on Uniswap V2 with SCX such as SCX/ETH then if the balance of ETH increases OR the balance of SCX decreases, the price of SCX will rise. This will create a difference in prices between Behodler and Uniswap, prompting SCX to be minted cheaply on Behodler in order to sell for a profit on Uniswap. The end result will be higher liquidity on Behodler. So all we need to spark a rise in the SCX price on Behodler is to have the balance of SCX on Uniswap decline. The way we achieve this is to give SCX a transfer fee that is burnt. Every time a trade occurs on Uniswap involving SCX, a fee is burnt which lowers the final balance of SCX which causes Uniswap to report a higher price for SCX which leads to token holders depositing into Behodler, raising liquidity.
In a sense, we are outsourcing the job of raising K to Uniswap (and Sushiswap).
What this all means is that we now have room to charge a trading fee on Behodler and use it entirely for some purpose other than growing liquidity because SCX takes care of liquidity growth. We could charge no fee but if we charge a fee similar to Uniswap, we wouldn’t chase any trade away. In addition, the low gas costs of Behodler give a bit of leeway here. The trick in charging a fee is to use it for maximum effect in such a way that Behodler experiences maximum benefit.
Abitrage is extracted at the point of trade and arbitrage is dominated by MEV bots so we now have an entry point to recapture MEV and use it for the good of Behodler. Instead of catering to high volume bots with no fees, Behodler aims to capture some bot volume and redirect it to serving the entire Behodler ecosystem via the mechanism of Pyrotokens.
When a swap or addition of liquidity occurs in Behodler, a portion (currently 0.5%) of the incoming token is set aside as a fee. This fee is either burnt as it is in the case of EYE, MKR and WeiDai or is sent to a pyrotoken reserve contract. The decision of what to do with the fee is made when the token is first listed on Behodler. The token is either burnable or not. If it isn’t burnable, we register a corresponding Pyrotoken. For example, LINK is not burnable so we have PyroLINK. To set up terminology, PyroLINK is the Pyrotoken and LINK is the base token. When a Pyrotoken is registered, it has a 1:1 redeem rate with its base token. So let’s say that as soon as PyroLINK was created, I minted 150 PyroLINK. This of course would cost me 150 LINK. The redeem rate is algorithmically calculated as the base token balance in reserve divided by the total Pyrotoken supply. In this case, 150/150 = 1. Now suppose, someone adds 1000 LINK to Behodler as liquidity in exchange for SCX. 5 LINK is set aside and sent to the PyroLINK reserve. Now the redeem rate is 155/150 = 1.033. This means that if I want to mint 3 PyroLINK, I have to send in (1.033x3=)3.1 LINK. However, this also means that if I redeem 50 PyroLINK, I’ll receive 51.66 LINK. Note that the redeem rate is dynamically calculated and so any burning or reserve growth automatically increases the price in the same block.
The price of a Pyrotoken relative to its base token can never fall but can only rise.
Pyrotokens burn on transfer with a fee of 0.1%. Since the redeem rate is algorithmically calculated, burning instantly raises the redeem rate for all holders. For instance, suppose we have 100 PNK in reserve and 100 PyroPNK in total. This implies a redeem rate of 1. Someone wants to trade PyroPNK on Uniswap and sends in 50. After the trade, 0.05 is burnt, leaving a total supply of 99.95. This implies a redeem rate of 100/99.95 =1.0005.
Finally, redeeming is levied with a 2% exit fee which is burnt. This redistributes value from token dumpers to Pyrotoken holders. For instance, suppose Bob owns 100 PyroFlan and Alice owns 6500 PyroFlan and that the redeem rate is 1:1. This means there is 6600 Flan in reserve. Alice fears a market downturn and wants to sell her Flan for ETH. She redeems the whole lot, incurring an exit fee of 130 which is burnt. Before the burn, she receives (6500–130=)6370 Flan at a redeem rate of 1. The supply of PyroFlan is now only what Bob owns which is 100 but the reserve of Flan is (100 + 130=)230 Flan. This implies a redeem rate of (230/100) = 2.3. This means that each remaining PyroFlan can now be redeemed for 2.3 Flan. Bob originally owned 100 Flan worth of PyroFlan. Now with Alice panic exiting, Bob’s base token position has risen in value from 100 Flan to 230 Flan.
Since value is transferred from traders, speculators and arbitrage bots to holders, the wisest thing to do with Pyrotokens is nothing. Let the bots work for you.
Automining and average value bonded (AVB)
Behodler currently has SCX/EYE LP and SCX/ETH LP listed as tradeable tokens. The Law of Uniform Tentacle implies that the balance of each of these on Behodler has to be equal to the average value bonded. We can use DAI to quickly inspect the AVB. At the time of writing, the DAI balance on Behodler was just over 16000. This means that there has to be $16000 of SCX/EYE and $16000 of SCX/ETH. Since Uniswap LPs balance their token value at 50% each at equilibrium, this means that for each SCX LP above, there is $8000 of SCX. Suppose the price of SCX rises such that the DAI balance on Behodler rises $1000 to $17000. Each of the SCX LPs would then have to rise in value to $17000. The SCX within would have to rise by $500 on each, implying that SCX locked in Behodler via the Uniswap LP would rise by $1000.
Why is this important? Suppose that instead of the above, there was no SCX LP listed on Behodler. Again suppose the price of SCX rises by $1000. In a Uniswap pair, when the value of one token in the pair rises, it is traded out of the pair and more of the less valuable token is traded in. This is the source of impermanent loss. So in this scenario, a rise in the value of SCX would lead to a less than equal rise in the value of the SCX LPs as SCX is withdrawn in order to rebalance the LPs. However, when listed on Behodler, the Law of Uniform tentacle forces the value of SCX in the pairs to rise by $500 each.
The net effect of listing SCX LPs on Behodler is to trap more SCX in Uniswap than would otherwise have occurred. And with more SCX locked in Uniswap, arbitrage bots can make bigger trades which leads to more SCX burning which leads to a rise in the price of SCX. This process of using Uniswap LP tokens to amplify the effect of an SCX burn on liquidity levels is known as automining because it leverages the base tokenomics of Behodler to effect more SCX burning than would otherwise occur had the LP tokens simply been left to their own devices.
Now it’s worth noting that each of those SCX LPs have corresponding Pyrotokens. So while Behodler offers the cheap option of zapping into LPs with a single token for a very low gas price (eg. buy SCX/EYE with ETH), the real protection from impermanent loss comes when you use your SCX/EYE to mint PyroSCX/EYE. Then not only do you get the Uniswap 0.3% fee and not only do you benefit from the Law of Uniform tentacle dragging up the value of your LP but you get a share of that 0.5% trading fee on all incoming SCX/EYE sales.
Given that Pyrotokens appreciate instantly in value when they’re transferred, we want to encourage as much burning of PyroSCX/EYE as possible. What’s the best way to do that? Listing it on an external AMM, of course. So let’s create two pairs to encourage bots to arbitrage trade PyroSCX/EYE as much as possible. First we create a pair that contains SCX and PyroSCX/EYE and next we create a pair that contain EYE and PyroSCX/EYE.
This gives us two pairs for swapping in and out of holding SCX/EYE by using one of the composite tokens. It also benefits from the fact that EYE is fairly well correlated with PyroSCX/EYE and SCX is fairly well correlated with PyroSCX/EYE so they’re both great LPs to own.
So to recap we now have the pairs (EYE;PyroSCX/EYE) and (SCX;PyroSCX/EYE) on Uniswap V2. Let’s give them each shorthand names to make talking about them less clunky. The first pair we’ll call EYE_fire and the second pair we’ll call SCX_fire. Unfortunately neither has much liquidity since no one knows about them. The bots ignore them both and no trading occurs and so PyroSCX/EYE doesn’t benefit from transfer burns. How can we instantly boost liquidity for each? List them both for trade on Behodler of course! So we list both EYE_fire and SCX_fire on Limbo with sufficiently high Flan APY to lure people into minting enough to drive them both across the migration threshold.
We now have a situation where $16000 of SCX_fire and $16000 of EYE_fire is listed on Behodler. This creates a platform for bots to trade PyroSCX/EYE which causes it to rise in value. In the case of SCX_fire, recall that it is a pair comprising (SCX;PyroSCX/EYE). If the extra trading causes PyroSCX/EYE to rise, then it will be traded out for the less valuable token. In this case, the less valuable token is SCX. So by rising in value, PyroSCX/EYE indirectly drives the minting of more SCX by drawing more of it into the LP.
What has listing SCX_fire and EYE_fire done to the quantity of locked SCX in Behodler? Tallying it all up,
SCX/EYE LP on Behodler implies $8000 of locked SCX
SCX;PyroSCX/EYE implies $8000 of SCX and $4000 of SCX = $12000
EYE;PyroSCX/EYE implies $4000 of SCX
Total = $24000 of locked SCX
This is aside from people just minting PyroSCX/EYE for holding.
Now the party doesn’t stop there. Recall that since EYE_fire and SCX_fire are Uniswap LP tokens, they’ll each get their own Pyrotokens. We can take PyroSCX_fire and pair it with SCX on Uniswap to add yet another layer of locked SCX for bot trading. This all leads to a lot of SCX burning which of course leads to a higher SCX price which leads to a higher AVB which leads to more SCX being drawn into Behodler and Uniswap, leading to bigger bot trades.
Yield honeypot for startups
Suppose you wish to launch a token for your new exciting project. The project is called CrystalKing and the native token is called Shard. CrystalKing is a game and instead of making players pay, you simply require they stake Shard. They receive 1 minute of game play for every hour 1 Shard is staked, 2 minutes if 2 Shard is staked for an hour and so on. You want to put the staked Shard to work but there’s no DeFi platform that pays a yield on Shard and you don’t have enough liquidity to encourage any. You’ve heard about Pyrotokens though. If you could get PyroShard created then you could swap the staked Shard out for PyroShard under the hood. Your users would get their game minutes and you’d get Pyrotoken yield as a revenue source.
You approach the Behodler community and ask them to list Shard on Limbo. They agree on condition that you airdrop Shard onto all SCX and EYE holders in equal proportions. You agree to the terms, Shard is listed on Limbo and the airdrop commences. You inform your community of the opportunity to yield farm Shard for Flan. The Behodler and CrystalKing communities ape into Limbo, pushing Shard into migration to Behodler and PyroShard is created. You are now able to implement your yield scheme and you constantly encourage your community to trade their Shard on Behodler, both for low gas and for the sake of boosting PyroShard’s value with trade revenue. By leveraging Pyrotoken yield and Limbo, Behodler becomes a yield bearing magnet for capital strapped but innovative projects to launch. In a sense, Pyrotokens allow Behodler to become an incubator for crypto startups. In return, Behodler attracts new audiences, receives free marketing and Behodler’s early adopters are routinely showered with treats such as airdrops and partnership perks.
Flan, PyroFlan and SCX
Flan’s price and liquidity is maintained by injecting SCX into the Flan/SCX pair every migration in a process known as price tilting. The higher the price of SCX, the more impact this process has in deepening Flan’s liquidity which creates more room for Limbo rewards. One obvious route to achieving this is to list the Pyrotoken of SCX/FLN on Limbo as a perpetual pool. Even a modest APY would create an excellent opportunity to build up your exposure to SCX/FLN, insulated from impermanent loss via the Pyro- wrapper. And of course offering a perpetual pool for PyroFlan would create an incentive to lock up as much Flan as possible.
Pyrotoken Yield Tree
So far, we’ve covered how Pyrotokens accelerate automining and we’ve shown how Limbo can encourage this process which in turn deepens Flan liquidity, giving Limbo more power. We’ve also seen how Pyrotokens are a marketing device for Behodler, creating an instrument for crypto startups. New projects listed on Limbo can experience an accelerated rise through the triangle of Limbo, Pyrotokens and Bonfire, the Fire-Combinator.
In the previous section we hinted at infinite Pyrotoken stacking where we followed the recipe:
# Stacking Recipe
1. List token on Limbo for migration
2. Once migrated, create Pyrotoken
3. Create LP token of Pyrotoken paired with either SCX/FLAN/EYE
4. Take LP token and return to step 1
In this scenario, you only hold the final Pyrotoken but it wraps a token which itself is an LP of two Pyrotokens which themselves are Pyrotokens of LP tokens and so on.
It would be more accurate to call this process weaving than stacking as the same token presents itself in different guises in many layers of the stack. For instance, in a Pyrotoken weave, we may see something like this:
Here SCX finds itself being introduced in layers 1 and 3. To be clear, you’d only need to hold 1 token, the Pyrotoken created at Layer 4 in order to be exposed to all the underlying layers. Let’s call this Pyrotoken “P4” since it’s the Pyrotoken created at Layer 4. So a question arises: since each Layer contains tokens that accrue fees, do holders of P4 accrue the fees of the entire stack?
Starting with Layer 1, we know that holders of SCX/DAI LP will accumulate trading fee revenue from Uniswap over time. The dollar price of the LP token is sum of the dollar values of the total locked SCX and DAI in the pair divided by the total supply of LP tokens for the pair.
For shorthand, we know that at rest, the dollar value of the tokens are equal. So if the pair contains 300 SCX and 10000 Dai then we know its total dollar value is $20000. If there are 400 LP tokens in total for this pair then we know the price per token is $50.
So rather than try to figure out the AMM dynamics of the pair, it’s easier to just think of it as a token with a price that increases in value over time because of trading revenue. The Pyrotoken created at Layer 2 (in this example we’ll call it P2) is simply a wrapper of Layer 1 and starts out at 1:1 redeem rate. Let’s assume the price of SCX/DAI is $1 to start. You mint 100 P2 which costs $100. The price of SCX/DAI increases to $1.25. Since your P2 redeems for SCX/DAI at a rate of 1:1, your stash of P2 is now worth $125.
Let’s continue with this example. P2 has increased by 25%. Layer 3 is a Uniswap LP token of P2 and SCX. Since P2 has increased in value, traders sell SCX into the pair in order to buy P2 so that the pair reaches dollar again. Both SCX and P2 are burn-on-transfer tokens. When P2 moves out of the pair, some of it is burnt, pushing up the redeem rate instantly. This means traders have to sell more SCX into the pair than they would have for a non pyrotoken in order to offset this instant value growth. This leads both to more SCX burning and more P2 burning. If the SCX being sold is being bought from the SCX/DAI pair, then that pair will receive trade revenue and P2 will rise even more, requiring that even more SCX is sold and P2 transferred, leading to even more SCX and P2 burning.
So it should be clear that merely having an Uniswap pair of a Pyrotoken and SCX creates much more trade activity than static tokens. This of course means that the LP created at Layer 3 generates more revenue than regular LP tokens, meaning that the Pyrotoken at Layer 4 (P4) grows in value faster than a Pyrotoken of a static LP.
Suppose now that someone mints P4. This requires they acquire the LP at layer 3. If they create it by pooling SCX and P2 then the act of doing so burns both SCX and P2 since pooling requires making transfers. If they start at the bottom of the weave then they bring burning to every level through all the necessary transfers. But even if they only buy P4 from an AMM, the extra demand will induce the market to percolate minting, trading and transfers up the weave.
The result of Pyrotoken weaving is that when any layer is perturbed, it creates a ripple effect of more burning of Pyrotokens at all levels, more trade revenue in Uniswap LP tokens at all levels and where it appears, more SCX burning at all levels. Pyrotoken weaves are therefore internally very synergistic: every token involved in a Pyrotoken weave does much better once the weave is assembled than in isolation.
The effect of Behodler on a Pyrotoken Weave
One concern that may arise when inspecting Figure 1 is over the LP tokens. Specifically, if the pairs on Uniswap contain too little liquidity to be attractive for traders then essentially those layers in the LP weave are inert wrappers and trading bots will ignore them. For new projects, this can often be the case and significant capital outlay is often required to overcome this hurdle. If this is the case, the Pyrotoken weave is simply an expensive, cumbersome wrapper token.
This is where Behodler comes in. Every Pyrotoken on Behodler can only be created from tokens listed on Behodler. This means the tokens at layers 1 and 3 have to be trading on Behodler. The Law of Uniform Tentacle requires that all tokens traded on Behodler have liquidity of equal dollar value in order for the prices to be at equilibrium. This means that if Behodler has $20000 of average value bonded (AVB) per token, the LP tokens at layers 1 and 3 have at least $20000 of locked value. This liquidity floor is certainly enough to encourage some trading activity within the LP tokens. It also means that as values and prices fluctuate on Behodler, trading of those LP tokens will lead to fee revenue flowing into the Pyrotokens in the layers above, leading those tokens to increase in value, creating an incentive for minting of those Pyrotokens. This creates another floor in liquidity for the LP tokens as not only does Behodler’s AVB guarantee liquidity but profit seekers wanting to accumulate Pyrotokens will bring in liquidity from elsewhere in order to mint. This of course leads to more Uniswap trade revenue within the pairs since arbitrage traders can make larger trades, and from the previous section, we know that this ripples outwards as increased value throughout the weave and more automining, which itself leads to a larger TVL on Behodler which raises the liquidity floor for all LP tokens on Behodler and so on.
To accelerate even more burning, it’s worth listing mirror LP tokens across AMMs on Behodler. So if we have SCX/EYE UniV2 LP, we should also list SCX/EYE SLP so that price drift between them leads to intra-Behodler arbitrage trade which siphons off trade revenue to Pyro(SCX/EYE UniV2LP) and Pyro(SCX/EYE SLP) which leads to more automining which… you get the picture.
The Limbo Effect
We know from the previous analysis that in a Pyrotoken weave, not only does revenue percolate up to the final token but any change in the price of a token in the weave can set off a ripple effect of value increase in all the other tokens. Furthermore, from the concept of automining, we know that a weave containing SCX will lead to more SCX burning and because of this, the average value bonded on Behodler will increase. This then leads to a higher floor of liquidity for all LP tokens listed on Behodler which allows arbitrage traders to make bigger trades which leads to more revenue in those LP tokens. For LP tokens that contain SCX, this leads to yet another round of all of the above. Let’s call this recursive cycle of value creation on Behodler the PyroCycle.
Now let’s introduce Limbo. If we create a perpetual pool of SCX and offer a high minimum APY then we can encourage large SCX lockup. This will boost the price of SCX which will lead to more SCX minting which will raise the AVB of Behodler which will accelerate the PyroCycle. In addition, a higher SCX price means that on each migration, the Flan liquidity can be increased more which means we can mint more Flan for rewards. If we use some of this extra Flan to incentivize locked SCX then we kick the PyroCycle up a gear.
But locked SCX doesn’t burn. So it would be preferable to lock up an LP token containing SCX since the increase in SCX locked on Uniswap will enable more trading of SCX which will create more burning of SCX. If we lock up SCX/Flan then we amplify the liquidity effect of migrations on Limbo which allows for yet more Flan minting.
Limbo allows us to begin listing more and more of these exotic Pyrotoken weaves, leading to an exponential takeoff in Behodler liquidity.
This article concludes a series that brings together all the cryptoeconomics of Behodler, illustrating how the AMM, Limbo, and Pyrotokens all work together in harmony. The launch of Limbo completes this circle and when we begin listing Pyrotoken weaves on Limbo, we will see an exponential takeoff of liquidity growth in Behodler. A common misconception is that Limbo simply expands the set of tokens on Behodler. However, the nature of SCX combined with the PyroCycle ensures that Limbo will have a rapidly accelerating impact on the liquidity depth of Behodler. As a side effect, Flan will eventually become one of the most liquid stablecoins in Ethereum and since LimboDAO offers the power to mint Flan, the Behodler community will essentially have a money printer on which to draw nearly unlimited funds for ecosystem growth. And just in case you thought I’d neglected a token, all of this will be governed by the use of EYE, a burnable token of diminishing supply, whose governance power will be through staking and slashing. Since a liquid token is better for governance, EYE will also make an appearance in many Pyrotoken Weaves. With the rise of Flan, funding of Behodler development activity can pivot away from EYE, ensuring that all cryptoeconomics surrounding EYE are towards maximizing lockup and burning.