I went back through the TermMax pre-mine documentation last night, trying to map out exactly how the TMX allocation is supposed to work once mainnet is live.
The core idea seems straightforward on the surface: 1 billion TMX total supply, with a portion set aside for monthly campaigns that start on day one of mainnet. Eligible participants fall into two groups....people holding fixed-rate PT tokens (bought on the lending page or via vault deposits) and order makers who provide liquidity through range or custom limit orders. Rewards accumulate continuously during each campaign window and stay non-transferable until TGE, when they convert 1:1.
What I kept circling back to is the APY calculation language. It references a $50 million daily volume and TVL figure, then distributes TMX based on prior-day deposits. I’m still unclear whether that volume assumption is a hard parameter baked into the smart contracts or just an illustrative example. If the actual matched volume comes in much lower or higher, does the effective rate scale linearly, or is there a cap or floor that isn’t spelled out here?
On the governance side, the note that points (Kudos) from the earlier Term Structure protocol are “under discussion” for conversion into TermMax rewards left me with more questions than answers. Who decides the conversion ratio, and is that decision on-chain or off-chain? The disclaimer also reserves the right to adjust the pre-mine timeline if it benefits the platform. That flexibility is practical, but it raises the usual decentralization trade-off: how much control remains with the team versus token holders after TGE?
Curious how others are reading the eligibility and claiming mechanics. Does the current design create any obvious concentration risks for early order makers versus passive PT holders?
#termmax @TermMax
The core idea seems straightforward on the surface: 1 billion TMX total supply, with a portion set aside for monthly campaigns that start on day one of mainnet. Eligible participants fall into two groups....people holding fixed-rate PT tokens (bought on the lending page or via vault deposits) and order makers who provide liquidity through range or custom limit orders. Rewards accumulate continuously during each campaign window and stay non-transferable until TGE, when they convert 1:1.
What I kept circling back to is the APY calculation language. It references a $50 million daily volume and TVL figure, then distributes TMX based on prior-day deposits. I’m still unclear whether that volume assumption is a hard parameter baked into the smart contracts or just an illustrative example. If the actual matched volume comes in much lower or higher, does the effective rate scale linearly, or is there a cap or floor that isn’t spelled out here?
On the governance side, the note that points (Kudos) from the earlier Term Structure protocol are “under discussion” for conversion into TermMax rewards left me with more questions than answers. Who decides the conversion ratio, and is that decision on-chain or off-chain? The disclaimer also reserves the right to adjust the pre-mine timeline if it benefits the platform. That flexibility is practical, but it raises the usual decentralization trade-off: how much control remains with the team versus token holders after TGE?
Curious how others are reading the eligibility and claiming mechanics. Does the current design create any obvious concentration risks for early order makers versus passive PT holders?
#termmax @TermMax