A pretty interesting idea.
My concern is the time and money that would be required to build it from scratch and the community potentially growing impatient while waiting. There’s also the (lack of) trust issue, and I can see community comments like, “They’re going to spend my reimbursement money on a game?” I don’t believe the Harmony team should build this. They should remain focused on the protocol.
However, perhaps there are games already on Harmony that would be willing to incorporate the unpegged assets into their games as part of a “stake-earn-play” component. How exactly that might work, I have no clue.
I do like the idea of staking the unpegged assets, and I think it needs to be mandatory in order to receive a “full” reimbursement (my reasoning briefly explained below).
{CLICK HERE} for some additional thoughts (ramblings) on reimbursement, the re-peg, staking unpegged assets, and a few ideas that could be utilized
To be blunt, without a loan or VC infusion I’m not sure any recovery plan will work. The only way to repay affected users would be to mint upwards of 5 billion coins, which was the original proposal that the community hated. There have been some good ideas floated by the community, but even combining the best ideas over a 3-year time frame, at ONE’s current price of $.023, they would only account for a fraction of the lost funds. Inflation would still be required to cover the majority. Even if everybody is reimbursed in ONE and the massive inflation doesn’t dump the value of the coin, it wouldn’t necessarily return the peg.
And I strongly believe Harmony must return the peg. If Harmony flatly refuses to re-peg like they did in their original “proposal”, then I question how viable Harmony’s defi future will be. Also not sure why anyone would ever bridge their assets to Harmony ever again, either. Harmony said they are putting the trustless bridge on hold because of the lack of trust at the moment. Now imagine that trust if Harmony never restores the peg. This goes for current and future projects willingness to build on Harmony as well.
But if Harmony does re-peg, which it must, it presents another issue where users could continuously sell as the peg is gradually restored. Mass selling could possibly knock the peg back down and prevent it from ever fully returning. To mitigate that, I think holders of unpegged assets should have to “stake” them in order to qualify for reimbursement. Stakers wouldn’t be able to take advantage of buying/selling the (hopefully) rising peg. And the longer you stake, the more “complete” your reimbursement becomes.
I would incorporate this “staking” process into the ideas by Shwaver (tweets) and/or @eddnorris (see “Alternatives”).
The downside is that there isn’t a “gamefi” aspect to it that would keep holders engaged, like you were suggesting.
Ideally, all affected users would have their original assets returned to their actual value. Having a 1ETH holder wait 3 years to receive “full” value of their assets (at a 2022 valuation) in the year 2025 is its own can of worms. What if ETH is worth much more in 2025 than it is currently? These holders would be hit with another loss. Maybe it would be best to have all unpegged non-stablecoin assets be swapped into unpegged stablecoins, like @Kvasir says here. I would assume you’d need to setup a portal where the swapping of non-stables into stables burns the non-stable assets, automatically helping to restore the peg of non-stables?