Obligation to hold FORT tokens to the protocols served by Forta Network

Currently, Forta Network provides security services to many networks. But it does not receive any payment for this security service. The cost of this service is covered by Forta token purchasers. I think this is wrong and unfair. This needs to change. Going through the Dydx example, Forta Network protect over $5 Billion in funds but charges no fees or payments for it. I believe that the protocols that Forta Network provides services should be required to hold FORT tokens at the rate of funds protected by Forta. This rate should be calculated in dollar terms of the assets protected. This rate should be decided by the community. In my opinion, 300,000 Fort tokens should be held and locked for every $1 billion. I believe that Forta will serve many protocols and networks in the future. Those who buy FORT tokens should not pay for this service.

6 Likes

It was a very logical proposal to protect the project value.

1 Like

Great idea! I fully support it!

1 Like

I totally support this issue.

1 Like

@Conqueror very interesting proposal and agree that it will be critical for Forta to implement some kind of deposit or fee structure to allow the network to be economically self-sustaining. One question is whether it should just be deposit-based (protocol “holds” FORT tokens to get coverage) or whether it should be fee-based (protocol “pays” FORT tokens to get coverage). Another question would be whether the amounts required to be held or paid should be relative to the amount of “value” that Forta is helping to protect, which might be hard to determine for some use cases of Forta for example when Forta is used to monitor fraud on user wallets or voting irregularities in governance. Another option to consider, for example, would be to have the held/paid amounts be based on some other Forta usage metrics such as the number of TXs and contracts watched and the number of bots involved. Interested to hear other thoughts and suggestions around user payments / fees for Forta users.

4 Likes

Hey, thank you for sharing your thoughts in detail and for your interest. This is how we should develop this idea together and decide on the best option for Forta. I like the idea of “the held/paid amounts be based on some other Forta usage metrics such as the number of TXs and contracts watched and the number of bots involved”. This can be a much better and fairer option than calculating by protected value. Instead of having to hold FORT tokens obligation to protocols, it could be fee-based (protocol “pays” FORT tokens to get coverage)this option can be considered. This is very logical. In addition, one of the main actors of Fort Network is the scanner operators. Every node owner has to stake FORT on the node to activate the node. Some apy can be brought to these staked FORT tokens. The protocols we serve may also be oblige to stake FORT tokens on Scanner addresses(+Fee structure). This is also an option. or Protocols can stake Fort tokens to a common pool, And the commission from there can be distributed to the Node operators.

1 Like

Great idea! It will encourage people and projects to buy and keep a coin to protect their own protocol!

2 Likes