Feedback Request: Updating AURA Allocation


Now that we’ve had a few votes utilizing our latest governance power methodology via AURA, I would like to hear from you regarding how we may redefine the scope and magnitude of AURA allocation for each of our tokens in our ecosystem so as to optimize our incentives and align them with governance authority.

Current Methodology

Proposals will be voted on, with AURA to decide the outcome. AURA is determined by:

  • SOUL-FTM: 2 AURA (per underlying SOUL)


    • Note: this is the SEANCE underlying the ENCHANT one has in their wallet.
    • Example
      • Rate: 2.5 SEANCE:ENCHANT
      • ENCHANT balance: 100
      • AURA Calc: 100 x 2.5 = 250 AURA
  • SOUL (balance): 1 AURA

Potential Additions

Soul Pairs


Enchant Pairs


Grim Pairs

  • Include all GRIM LP equivalents.

Unsure how to find your AURA?
Visit FtmScan to query your power: here

Feedback Requested

Please give us your thoughts and opinions, so we may proceed with introducing a proposal for changes we find most reasonable.

Warm Regards,


Yes, I would prefer the Soul, Seance and Enchant that is locked in pools at least paired with either Soul, Seance or Enchant and actually Fantom too, like you have the Soul/Fantom LP, so I think you should include Seance/FTM and Enchant/FTM. These coins, the 4 of them are the most fundamental of this protocol and by having them in any form it contributes to the existence of SoulSwap. USDC or FUSDT and other coins benefit us much less, they’re contributing to other chains or apps or even monetary systems. The other problem with assigning USDT and FUSD pairs an AURA reward is that why choose those? Why not also BTC or ETH or all of the pairings - there is some benefit to any pairing. So I’d personally keep it to SOUL,SEANCE and ENCHANT.

Because SOUL is the base coin and gives you free SEANCE and ENCHANT basically, I think it’s more valuable or should be more rewarded in AURA terms so essentially as I see it SOUL is senior to SEANCE and ENCHANT.

ENCHANT is senior to SEANCE
SEANCE is bottom
Fantom is also bottom.

You could do 3, 2, 1, 1 allocations and then add them up like that in the Farms. And if SEANCE is in the wallet it’s worth 1 point because it does represent 1 SOUL that you have.

SOUL/FTM worth 4 Aura.




SOUL in wallet worth 1 Aura
ENCAHNT in wallet worth 1 Aura.
SEANCE in wallet worth 1 Aura

Something like that.

1 Like

Thanks so much for your feedback. I will address this in a few parts to clearly state my position on what you’ve discussed.

I want to address your aversion towards including our protocol assets paired with stable coin, as expressed:

USDC or FUSDT and other coins benefit us much less, they’re contributing to other chains or apps or even monetary systems. The other problem with assigning USDT and FUSD pairs an AURA reward is that why choose those? Why not also BTC or ETH or all of the pairings

The reasons for including assets other than our ecosystem’s 3 is due to the added benefits that come with being paired with a stable-asset and remain objective in our pairs as a stable coin does not require one to take any position on an asset other than the value of SOUL as a stable asset does not fluctuate in value, whereas BTC and ETH do. Finally, absent an extra incentive, I fear our stable pairs are in dire need of deeper pockets of liquidity for the health of our ecosystem as a whole.

In summary, I support the inclusion of stable paired-assets with SOUL-SEANCE-ENCHANT and do not support the inclusion of non-stables beyond FTM, for the following reasons:

  1. Less Slippage, More Reliability: of having reliable price oracles and less slippage onboarding and off-boarding with stables, as traders tend to do.

  2. Objectivity: stables don’t require users to bet on the performance of any asset other than our Soul Protocol trio.

  3. Liquidity Incentive: we need more liquidity for our protocol assets that are paired with stable coins.

1 Like

In response to including protocol pairs, I would object to this solely because these pairs are effectively less beneficial to our overall ecosystem as it relates to drawing liquidity non-intrinsically. Pooling together the value of our assets in such a manner means progressively less in terms of realized underlying value once their collective value is greater than the value backed by liquid assets. In this case, I would value the inclusion of SOUL paired with USDC over the inclusion of SOUL paired with ENCHANT. There are already sufficient incentives to utilize your assets in a combination to acquire more SOUL, but at any given point there ought to be progressively-stronger, competing incentives to provide liquidity to pairs that are partially extrinsic.

That being that said, I am open to entertaining more complex pairing, such as SOUL-FTM LP + SEANCE-FTM LP together as a LP token itself. This was one concept I mulled over for awhile to incentivize deeper integration with our liquidity incentives in an interesting and complex - yet - easily-executable manner. This might not be as clear as it is in my mind, so feel free to ask for more details on this topic as it is kinda foreign to most, but think of BAL or BEETS and how their pools are comprised of a complex set or “basket” of assets. This is what I am referring to as another option for deriving additional AURA.

Overall, I think what we can do is proceed with a vote on adding one component at a time, so we know exactly what is supported and what is not, but we can continue the conversation on each new component on this page as they are effectively the same topic.

I’m in favor of adding all of them. I think in an ideal world, all token holders should get a say in governance (regardless of where they staked them), so the more inclusive it is, the better.

Ok, I see your reasoning, Buns and think it’s good.

Essentially I see that AURA should be a representation of a person’s investment in the project, both financial and personal. It’s trying to be a fair representation of their stake in the project.

So I think some bits of that investment are being overlooked. For example, in your OP you’re not rewarding SOUL staked in the Seance pool but it is rewarded by sitting in their wallet.

Essentially someone shouldn’t get doubly rewarded for the same thing - i.e. AURA for SOUL in the SEANCE pool and then SEANCE in their wallet. But they should get rewarded for 1 of those things (although this is very hard to track given the nature of the protocol). Staking SOUL is being more invested in the project than just holding it in the wallet so they should either be rewarded for the staked SOUL or their wallet-SEANCE. Certainly I think that’s as valid as rewarding wallet-SOUL. If they put all that SEANCE in the Circles, currently that person gets no AURA at all despite having maybe a million SOUL staked - a big investment with no recognition, not fair I don’t think.

It would be simplest in that area to just reward the SOUL staked in the Seance pool because tracking it after that is a nightmare.

After this - what value is the person bringing to the project or others? If they are in an LP they are creating pools and bringing value so they should be rewarded with AURA. Arguably any pool they’re staked in with protocol pair could be rewarded but if we’re going for a limited amount then I’m ok with that.

I agree with the SOUL pairs you’ve suggested and I agree with the ENCHANT pairs you’ve suggested.
I do think SEANCE-FTM should be rewarded too - they’ll be rewarded slightly less than if they had ENCHANT because of the rate (ENCHANT to SEANCE) but I that’s fair, it’s still a valuable pool for the protocol. Then you have SOUL, ENCHANT and SEANCE paired with FTM.

OMG it’s so complicated trying to look at how to reward someone for their investment but how to not reward them doubly for the same investment! :crazy_face:

So, I agree with the pairs you’ve put in your OP

Also add SEANCE - FTM.

Add SOUL in the Seance staking pool for 1 AURA

1 Like