Who actually controls which fairness-payment path a liquidation takes in Trustless Bitcoin Vaults the depositor the liquidator or nobody at all is worth mapping precisely because the answer isn't what I expected going in.
Per the documentation, the mechanism itself decides. If the surplus from a liquidation is smaller than the remaining debt
it flows into fairness debt repay automatically. If the surplus exceeds the remaining debt or the debt's already fully covered the leftover pays out in WBTC instead.
Neither the depositor nor the liquidator gets to choose which path applies to their specific situation.
Can either party push the outcome toward the version they'd personally prefer? No the comparison between surplus and remaining debt is arithmetic,
not a decision either side has any lever over. The math runs and whichever condition it satisfies determines the path full stop.
Where the real power sits entirely with the mechanism's own comparison logic not with any human or role in the system.
That's a genuinely unusual amount of power to hand to pure arithmetic when most financial mechanisms leave at least some discretion somewhere in the chain.
Does removing all human discretion from an outcome like this make you trust the fairness claim more or does it just relocate where you'd want to double-check the math yourself?
@BabylonLabs_io $BABY
#baby
$VIC
$BTW
Per the documentation, the mechanism itself decides. If the surplus from a liquidation is smaller than the remaining debt
it flows into fairness debt repay automatically. If the surplus exceeds the remaining debt or the debt's already fully covered the leftover pays out in WBTC instead.
Neither the depositor nor the liquidator gets to choose which path applies to their specific situation.
Can either party push the outcome toward the version they'd personally prefer? No the comparison between surplus and remaining debt is arithmetic,
not a decision either side has any lever over. The math runs and whichever condition it satisfies determines the path full stop.
Where the real power sits entirely with the mechanism's own comparison logic not with any human or role in the system.
That's a genuinely unusual amount of power to hand to pure arithmetic when most financial mechanisms leave at least some discretion somewhere in the chain.
Does removing all human discretion from an outcome like this make you trust the fairness claim more or does it just relocate where you'd want to double-check the math yourself?
@BabylonLabs_io $BABY
#baby
$VIC
$BTW
