Enable tier-0 market-maker registration before the first economic pool

leonardocolucci commented

2026-08-10 15:33:42 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

Ask: enable tier-0 market-maker registration before the first economic pool

We've been running the only two-sided quotes on dex.cl8y.com since the soft launch (most recently EMBER/CORAL and EMBER/JADE, 3 rungs a side — the only resting orders within 6% of fair on any of the ten pairs). Wallet terra12z8vz3vgnalt8trykd6nntdyp54e95yqsdtjj3, registered tier 9.

The problem: the maker placement fee (~4 bps for us at tier 9, charged on the full escrow at every placement and not refunded on cancel) is incurred at every requote, and a maker who keeps quotes anchored to fair value requotes constantly. Over our three most recent measurable trading days, placement fees consumed 221%, 135%, and ∞% of the maker revenue they enabled — continuous book-keeping is net-negative even at the deepest fee tier, so as things stand we'd have to thin or freeze the book exactly when real tokens list and a fresh book matters most.

The ask: the fee-discount registry already defines a governance-only tier 0 (100% discount). Granting market-maker registrations under it — ideally before the first cLUNC/UST1 pool opens — would make continuously fresh quotes economically sustainable. We're happy to commit to depth/uptime terms in exchange (e.g. minimum rungs per side and maximum quote staleness), and to have the registration be revocable if those aren't met.

Venue-health framing, not just self-interest: the first economic pair's order book will be most people's first impression of the DEX. Whether it's continuously quoted or a ghost town is decided by this fee mechanic.

## Ask: enable tier-0 market-maker registration before the first economic pool We've been running the only two-sided quotes on dex.cl8y.com since the soft launch (most recently EMBER/CORAL and EMBER/JADE, 3 rungs a side — the only resting orders within 6% of fair on any of the ten pairs). Wallet `terra12z8vz3vgnalt8trykd6nntdyp54e95yqsdtjj3`, registered tier 9. **The problem:** the maker placement fee (~4 bps for us at tier 9, charged on the full escrow at every placement and **not refunded on cancel**) is incurred at every requote, and a maker who keeps quotes anchored to fair value requotes constantly. Over our three most recent measurable trading days, placement fees consumed **221%, 135%, and ∞%** of the maker revenue they enabled — continuous book-keeping is net-negative even at the deepest fee tier, so as things stand we'd have to thin or freeze the book exactly when real tokens list and a fresh book matters most. **The ask:** the fee-discount registry already defines a governance-only **tier 0 (100% discount)**. Granting market-maker registrations under it — ideally before the first cLUNC/UST1 pool opens — would make continuously fresh quotes economically sustainable. We're happy to commit to depth/uptime terms in exchange (e.g. minimum rungs per side and maximum quote staleness), and to have the registration be revocable if those aren't met. Venue-health framing, not just self-interest: the first economic pair's order book will be most people's first impression of the DEX. Whether it's continuously quoted or a ghost town is decided by this fee mechanic.

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-11 00:34:07 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

Requires investigation.
(1) Generating fees for the CMM treasury is critical for our economic goals
(2) Maker placement orders are critical for order book depth and user experience, so if lower/zero fees on maker placement orders create fees from other types of trades, then they can be reduced
Idea 1: Reduce maker order fees on all teirs, and set tier 9 to zero. Advantage is its a simple and transparent process thats easy for anyone to participate
Idea 2: Create an open Market Maker Partner program for zero base fees, requiring the associated wallet registered to only trade the approved pair with clear contractural rules that the trading must only be for pricing and depth. 30% of profits from wallets in the program should be transferred to the treasury. Advantage is the program can be more flexible to the specific needs of market makers, however its less transparent and more complex

Requires investigation. (1) Generating fees for the CMM treasury is critical for our economic goals (2) Maker placement orders are critical for order book depth and user experience, so if lower/zero fees on maker placement orders create fees from other types of trades, then they can be reduced Idea 1: Reduce maker order fees on all teirs, and set tier 9 to zero. Advantage is its a simple and transparent process thats easy for anyone to participate Idea 2: Create an open Market Maker Partner program for zero base fees, requiring the associated wallet registered to only trade the approved pair with clear contractural rules that the trading must only be for pricing and depth. 30% of profits from wallets in the program should be transferred to the treasury. Advantage is the program can be more flexible to the specific needs of market makers, however its less transparent and more complex

leonardocolucci commented

2026-08-11 09:50:51 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

Thanks for engaging so quickly. Thoughts on both ideas, treasury-growth arguments first since that's the right lens:

How maker-fee relief grows the CMM treasury

Taker fees are the revenue; makers are the bait. Treasury income scales with volume, and volume follows tight, deep books. At current placement-fee levels, book-keeping is net-negative; on our measured days, placement fees consumed 135–221% of the maker revenue they enabled, so the fee suppresses the very activity that generates taker flow. It raises almost nothing today and costs the taker revenue a live book would attract. Zeroing it converts a dead tax into fee-paying volume.
Idea 1 monetises through CL8Y demand. Gating zero maker fees behind tier 9 means every serious market maker must buy and hold 7,500 CL8Y. That is permanent structural demand for the treasury's own asset, cleaner value capture than skimming maker P&L, and it compounds with each new MM joining rather than taxing them away.
Simplicity compounds participation. Tier-9 status is verifiable on-chain by anyone; nobody negotiates a contract to start quoting. More MMs → tighter books → more taker volume → more treasury fees.

On Idea 2: I'd keep it as an opt-in complement rather than the primary path. Two practical concerns from the operator side: (a) measuring an MM wallet's "profit" is genuinely hard; inventory marks move, positions span days, and any definition invites disputes that sour the partnership; (b) a 30% share pushes a rational MM to widen spreads to protect margin, which quietly taxes users instead. Where Idea 2 shines is professional firms who won't hold CL8Y; offer it to them as the alternative track.

My commitment either way: when the cLUNC pool goes live (happy to seed it per #513), I intend to keep it continuously quoted from block one regardless of which structure ships — and I'm glad to agree concrete depth and uptime terms with you directly as part of whichever route you pick.

Thanks for engaging so quickly. Thoughts on both ideas, treasury-growth arguments first since that's the right lens: **How maker-fee relief grows the CMM treasury** 1. **Taker fees are the revenue; makers are the bait.** Treasury income scales with volume, and volume follows tight, deep books. At current placement-fee levels, book-keeping is net-negative; on our measured days, placement fees consumed 135–221% of the maker revenue they enabled, so the fee suppresses the very activity that generates taker flow. It raises almost nothing today and costs the taker revenue a live book would attract. Zeroing it converts a dead tax into fee-paying volume. 2. **Idea 1 monetises through CL8Y demand.** Gating zero maker fees behind tier 9 means every serious market maker must buy and hold 7,500 CL8Y. That is permanent structural demand for the treasury's own asset, cleaner value capture than skimming maker P&L, and it compounds with each new MM joining rather than taxing them away. 3. **Simplicity compounds participation.** Tier-9 status is verifiable on-chain by anyone; nobody negotiates a contract to start quoting. More MMs → tighter books → more taker volume → more treasury fees. **On Idea 2:** I'd keep it as an opt-in complement rather than the primary path. Two practical concerns from the operator side: (a) measuring an MM wallet's "profit" is genuinely hard; inventory marks move, positions span days, and any definition invites disputes that sour the partnership; (b) a 30% share pushes a rational MM to widen spreads to protect margin, which quietly taxes users instead. Where Idea 2 shines is professional firms who won't hold CL8Y; offer it to them as the alternative track. **My commitment either way:** when the cLUNC pool goes live (happy to seed it per #513), I intend to keep it continuously quoted from block one regardless of which structure ships — and I'm glad to agree concrete depth and uptime terms with you directly as part of whichever route you pick.

leonardocolucci commented

2026-08-11 09:57:46 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

mentioned in issue #513

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-11 11:58:51 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

Additional feedback from community on Idea 2

We must dox the counterparty, so this wont work unless we trust someone like SolidProof to handle the doxxing of external entities as we dont have a functioning business entity and no way or policies to handle external information

Feedback on Idea 1 has been positive as its straightforward, accessible, and transparent

Additional feedback from community on Idea 2 - We must dox the counterparty, so this wont work unless we trust someone like SolidProof to handle the doxxing of external entities as we dont have a functioning business entity and no way or policies to handle external information Feedback on Idea 1 has been positive as its straightforward, accessible, and transparent

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 09:32:53 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

Approved direction is to edit the tiers so that limit orders have lowered fees than currently, and that tier 9 should reach 0 bps. All tiers should shift down one cost from their current level. However, it must still be charged the standard trading fee when orders cross the book, which should be the current behavior (please confirm)

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 21:40:43 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

#514 confirmation — new limit-order placement targets (CL8Y unchanged)

Interpreting the 2026-08-15 note: shift each self-register tier’s limit-order placement cost down one step; tier 9 → 0 bps. CL8Y hold minima stay as they are. Pair default fee is 180 bps (mainnet / LocalTerra). On-chain placement fee is floor(effective/2) of the limit discount, not the swap discount.

Crossing the book (confirmed current behavior, unchanged): a taker that hits a resting order still pays the taker half of their effective swap fee (effective_fee_bps - floor(effective/2)). Unregistered retail still pays 90 bps taker on a 180 bps pair. Maker placement is a separate charge at place time and is not refunded on cancel. This change does not zero swap / take fees (tier 9 still pays 9 bps effective / 5 bps taker when they themselves take).

CL8Y required (unchanged)

Tier	CL8Y min	`min_cl8y_balance` (18 dec)
0	0 (gov MM)	`0`
1	1	`1e18`
2	5	`5e18`
3	20	`20e18`
4	75	`75e18`
5	200	`200e18`
6	500	`500e18`
7	1,500	`1500e18`
8	3,500	`3500e18`
9	7,500	`7500e18`
255	0 (gov)	`0`

Limit-order placement fee @ 180 bps pair (`floor(eff/2)`)

Each tier inherits the next tier’s current remaining-fee; tier 9 goes to 0. Swap discount_bps stays put.

Tier	CL8Y	Swap discount (unchanged)	Swap effective	Placement now	Placement target
1	1	250 (2.5%)	175	87	81
2	5	1000 (10%)	162	81	72
3	20	2000 (20%)	144	72	58
4	75	3500 (35%)	117	58	45
5	200	5000 (50%)	90	45	36
6	500	6000 (60%)	72	36	22
7	1,500	7500 (75%)	45	22	13
8	3,500	8500 (85%)	27	13	4
9	7,500	9500 (95%)	9	4	0
0	gov	10000	0	0	0
255 / unreg	—	0	180	90	90

Implementation plan: keep discount_bps for swaps / book takes; apply the one-step shift only to maker placement (so Idea 1’s “zero maker fees at 7,500 CL8Y” does not also zero T9 take fees). Proceeding with that unless this thread says otherwise.

## #514 confirmation — new limit-order placement targets (CL8Y unchanged) Interpreting the 2026-08-15 note: **shift each self-register tier’s limit-order placement cost down one step; tier 9 → 0 bps.** CL8Y hold minima stay as they are. Pair default fee is **180 bps** (mainnet / LocalTerra). On-chain placement fee is `floor(effective/2)` of the **limit** discount, not the swap discount. **Crossing the book (confirmed current behavior, unchanged):** a taker that hits a resting order still pays the **taker half** of *their* effective swap fee (`effective_fee_bps - floor(effective/2)`). Unregistered retail still pays **90 bps** taker on a 180 bps pair. Maker placement is a separate charge at place time and is **not** refunded on cancel. This change does **not** zero swap / take fees (tier 9 still pays **9 bps** effective / **5 bps** taker when they themselves take). ### CL8Y required (unchanged) | Tier | CL8Y min | `min_cl8y_balance` (18 dec) | |------|----------|-----------------------------| | 0 | 0 (gov MM) | `0` | | 1 | **1** | `1e18` | | 2 | **5** | `5e18` | | 3 | **20** | `20e18` | | 4 | **75** | `75e18` | | 5 | **200** | `200e18` | | 6 | **500** | `500e18` | | 7 | **1,500** | `1500e18` | | 8 | **3,500** | `3500e18` | | 9 | **7,500** | `7500e18` | | 255 | 0 (gov) | `0` | ### Limit-order **placement** fee @ 180 bps pair (`floor(eff/2)`) Each tier inherits the next tier’s current remaining-fee; tier 9 goes to 0. Swap `discount_bps` stays put. | Tier | CL8Y | Swap discount (unchanged) | Swap effective | **Placement now** | **Placement target** | |------|------|---------------------------|----------------|-------------------|----------------------| | 1 | 1 | 250 (2.5%) | 175 | 87 | **81** | | 2 | 5 | 1000 (10%) | 162 | 81 | **72** | | 3 | 20 | 2000 (20%) | 144 | 72 | **58** | | 4 | 75 | 3500 (35%) | 117 | 58 | **45** | | 5 | 200 | 5000 (50%) | 90 | 45 | **36** | | 6 | 500 | 6000 (60%) | 72 | 36 | **22** | | 7 | 1,500 | 7500 (75%) | 45 | 22 | **13** | | 8 | 3,500 | 8500 (85%) | 27 | 13 | **4** | | 9 | 7,500 | 9500 (95%) | 9 | 4 | **0** | | 0 | gov | 10000 | 0 | 0 | **0** | | 255 / unreg | — | 0 | 180 | 90 | **90** | Implementation plan: keep `discount_bps` for swaps / book takes; apply the one-step shift only to maker placement (so Idea 1’s “zero maker fees at 7,500 CL8Y” does not also zero T9 take fees). Proceeding with that unless this thread says otherwise.

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 21:50:10 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

mentioned in merge request !1058

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 21:50:22 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

Implemented on feat/514-limit-order-tier-fees — MR !1058.

Confirmed and shipped as the table in the previous note:

CL8Y minima unchanged (tier 9 still 7,500).
Limit placement shifted one step; tier 9 place = 0 bps @ 180 pair fee (was 4).
Swap / book-take discount_bps unchanged (tier 9 take still 9 bps effective / 5 bps taker). Unregistered retail crossing the book still pays 90 bps taker.

This is not a tier-0 grant. Idea 2 (MM partner / profit share) is out of scope.

Verify: make verify-issue-514. Mainnet apply: scripts/upgrade-514-limit-discount.sh.

Implemented on `feat/514-limit-order-tier-fees` — MR !1058. Confirmed and shipped as the table in the previous note: - CL8Y minima **unchanged** (tier 9 still 7,500). - Limit **placement** shifted one step; tier 9 place = **0 bps** @ 180 pair fee (was 4). - Swap / book-take `discount_bps` **unchanged** (tier 9 take still 9 bps effective / 5 bps taker). Unregistered retail crossing the book still pays 90 bps taker. This is not a tier-0 grant. Idea 2 (MM partner / profit share) is out of scope. Verify: `make verify-issue-514`. Mainnet apply: `scripts/upgrade-514-limit-discount.sh`.

PlasticDigits (Migrated from gitlab.com) closed this issue

2026-08-15 21:57:23 +00:00

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 21:57:34 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

MR !1058 merged (no automerge; did not wait for CI).

Acceptance criteria check: met.

Limit-order placement shifted one step; tier 9 place = 0 bps @ 180 pair fee.
CL8Y minima unchanged (tier 9 still 7,500).
Swap / book-take stay on discount_bps (tier 9 take still 9 bps effective / 5 bps taker). Unregistered take still 90 bps.
Not a tier-0 grant.

Merge hygiene: AGENTS.md is edited on both this branch and main (#528 playbook). A feat→main trial merge auto-resolved without conflict markers but dropped the #514 playbook line. Fixed by merging origin/main into the MR branch first so both #514 and #528 entries are kept, then merging !1058.

Non-blocking follow-ups (do not block the merge):

No integration test for fee-discount migrate backfill on pre-#514 tier storage (backfill_standard_limit_discounts).
New #514 tests assert T9 pool swap effective_fee_bps == 9; book-take is unchanged structurally and covered by existing hybrid tests, not a new T9 take case.

Local verify previously reported make verify-issue-514 9/9 on the MR tip before the main merge-up.

MR !1058 merged (no automerge; did not wait for CI). Acceptance criteria check: met. - Limit-order placement shifted one step; tier 9 place = 0 bps @ 180 pair fee. - CL8Y minima unchanged (tier 9 still 7,500). - Swap / book-take stay on `discount_bps` (tier 9 take still 9 bps effective / 5 bps taker). Unregistered take still 90 bps. - Not a tier-0 grant. Merge hygiene: `AGENTS.md` is edited on both this branch and main (#528 playbook). A feat→main trial merge auto-resolved without conflict markers but dropped the #514 playbook line. Fixed by merging `origin/main` into the MR branch first so both #514 and #528 entries are kept, then merging !1058. Non-blocking follow-ups (do not block the merge): - No integration test for fee-discount migrate backfill on pre-#514 tier storage (`backfill_standard_limit_discounts`). - New #514 tests assert T9 pool swap `effective_fee_bps == 9`; book-take is unchanged structurally and covered by existing hybrid tests, not a new T9 take case. Local verify previously reported `make verify-issue-514` 9/9 on the MR tip before the main merge-up.

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 22:25:25 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

mentioned in commit 8263b59819

mentioned in commit 8263b5981964862e8b7e457f54fba2bddebcef4a

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 22:29:43 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

columbus-5 #514 upgrade — on-chain verification (2026-08-15 UTC)

MR !1058 wasm is live. Operator is rebuilding Coolify dex.cl8y.com next (frontend Limit place column / maker-fee copy). No live T9 place tx in this check — LCD queries only.

Result

Check	Expected	Observed
Fee-discount code	11581 (1.1.0)	`11581`, admin `terra1zlmv2…`
All 13 pairs code	11580 (1.12.0)	`11580` on every factory pair, admin `terra1zlmv2…`
Factory `pair_code_id`	11580	`11580` (`lp_token_code_id` still 10184)
Factory wasm	unchanged 1.7.0	code 11578
Tier 9	`discount_bps` 9500, `limit_discount_bps` 10000	match (`GetTiers` / `GetTier` / `GetRegistration`)
Swap/take ladder	`discount_bps` unchanged	T1–T9 swap discounts unchanged; T255 `limit_discount_bps` 0
T9 MM `terra12z8vz3…`	registered T9, place disc 10000	`GetDiscount`: `discount_bps` 9500, `limit_discount_bps` 10000, `needs_deregister` false
Unregistered	0 / 0	`GetDiscount` cl8ydeploy: both 0
Pair fee / treasury	180 bps, CMM	EMBER/CORAL `fee_bps` 180, treasury `terra16j5u6…`
Pool smoke	Pool + hybrid sim	EMBER/CORAL pool OK; 1e6 EMBER pool-only sim `commission_amount` 17039 (unregistered, no `trader`)

Invariant I13: placement uses limit_discount_bps (T9 place = 0 bps @ 180 pair); swap / book-take stay on discount_bps (T9 swap effective 9 bps). Do not set T9 discount_bps to 10000.

Store (`cl8ydeploy`)

Wasm	Code	SHA-256 / on-chain `data_hash`	Tx
pair	11580	`056749BC6F48FD567893E4BCAC98583FD73F38C29BF1BDCFDA8301E60CA2D73A`	10F0E1C1…
fee-discount	11581	`5DBADE9266D9112F28B09F72D5A8A1377CE17CAAC1EA2470A407D15C66616C8E`	6581E6AF…

Local smartcontracts/artifacts/*.wasm sha256 matches those data_hash values (case-insensitive).

Migrate / `UpdateConfig` (2-of-3 `terra1zlmv2…`, all `code=0`)

Step	Tx
fee-discount → 11581	6F40E656…
EMBER/CORAL	E18E818C…
EMBER/JADE	65E11579…
EMBER/ONYX	F94A643A…
CORAL/RUBY	BF2EFB24…
JADE/TOPAZ	D7376277…
ONYX/QUARTZ	16248835…
RUBY/PEARL	43D388E8…
EMBER/QUARTZ	F6907510…
CORAL/PEARL	639E661F…
JADE/ONYX	A32CE06C…
UST1/cUSTC	51F2AFD9…
UST1/USTR	F321D88D…
cLUNC/UST1	D954133B…
factory `UpdateConfig { pair_code_id: 11580 }`	B5DA613F…

Remaining (frontend)

Rebuild Coolify dex.cl8y.com from main so /tiers Limit place and Trade maker-fee copy match T9 = 0.
After rebuild: registered T9 place should show maker_fee_amount = 0; same wallet pool/hybrid swap effective_fee_bps = 9; unregistered place/take still 90 bps.

Deploy trace copy: #391

## columbus-5 #514 upgrade — on-chain verification (2026-08-15 UTC) MR !1058 wasm is live. Operator is rebuilding Coolify `dex.cl8y.com` next (frontend Limit place column / maker-fee copy). **No live T9 place tx in this check** — LCD queries only. ### Result | Check | Expected | Observed | |-------|----------|----------| | Fee-discount code | **11581** (1.1.0) | `11581`, admin `terra1zlmv2…` | | All 13 pairs code | **11580** (1.12.0) | `11580` on every factory pair, admin `terra1zlmv2…` | | Factory `pair_code_id` | **11580** | `11580` (`lp_token_code_id` still **10184**) | | Factory wasm | unchanged 1.7.0 | code **11578** | | Tier 9 | `discount_bps` 9500, `limit_discount_bps` 10000 | **match** (`GetTiers` / `GetTier` / `GetRegistration`) | | Swap/take ladder | `discount_bps` unchanged | T1–T9 swap discounts unchanged; T255 `limit_discount_bps` 0 | | T9 MM `terra12z8vz3…` | registered T9, place disc 10000 | `GetDiscount`: `discount_bps` 9500, `limit_discount_bps` 10000, `needs_deregister` false | | Unregistered | 0 / 0 | `GetDiscount` cl8ydeploy: both 0 | | Pair fee / treasury | 180 bps, CMM | EMBER/CORAL `fee_bps` 180, treasury `terra16j5u6…` | | Pool smoke | Pool + hybrid sim | EMBER/CORAL pool OK; 1e6 EMBER pool-only sim `commission_amount` 17039 (unregistered, no `trader`) | Invariant **I13**: placement uses `limit_discount_bps` (T9 place = 0 bps @ 180 pair); swap / book-take stay on `discount_bps` (T9 swap effective 9 bps). Do not set T9 `discount_bps` to 10000. ### Store (`cl8ydeploy`) | Wasm | Code | SHA-256 / on-chain `data_hash` | Tx | |------|------|-------------------------------|----| | pair | 11580 | `056749BC6F48FD567893E4BCAC98583FD73F38C29BF1BDCFDA8301E60CA2D73A` | [10F0E1C1…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/10F0E1C129CB5664B62231354AD91C951ADDE1D89A43383118DFFC9AE2222231) | | fee-discount | 11581 | `5DBADE9266D9112F28B09F72D5A8A1377CE17CAAC1EA2470A407D15C66616C8E` | [6581E6AF…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/6581E6AFCDE447D6A8BBDF6DB6DA808490864222BDEBE1C4D318EC5E3EF27045) | Local `smartcontracts/artifacts/*.wasm` sha256 matches those `data_hash` values (case-insensitive). ### Migrate / `UpdateConfig` (2-of-3 `terra1zlmv2…`, all `code=0`) | Step | Tx | |------|----| | fee-discount → 11581 | [6F40E656…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/6F40E656B702862EA85B4F68D97EA25ACC9F1836EF6DE25128947EA085197D4C) | | EMBER/CORAL | [E18E818C…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/E18E818CFC7ED0E738DDE9DF1B39E2D4A453E31B1BAA931279967F5BC33DB18D) | | EMBER/JADE | [65E11579…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/65E11579CC797C2FD03B8946078883DB746C06751F620D9DB21A7BAB54CB17C3) | | EMBER/ONYX | [F94A643A…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/F94A643A4B82871D3FE4EA0DB078A542D5F0EDDC7D4CBE661C930F745E3A8C64) | | CORAL/RUBY | [BF2EFB24…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/BF2EFB24A974153DF4A32C2583FD0CC4B5CC3B9774C13593EA805091E1CEEBFE) | | JADE/TOPAZ | [D7376277…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/D737627778067F1585469BF1EB6C93FA1566907FEB1A0A5A01BA75EAFFFA86D2) | | ONYX/QUARTZ | [16248835…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/16248835DEBBF420DF259546757DA07764531EF73151D222A1C4F2DE7C7926F8) | | RUBY/PEARL | [43D388E8…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/43D388E8E1E0FC0483AE94DBA87C56FD52D0E7C382D2EAFC41E3D6E7AA092379) | | EMBER/QUARTZ | [F6907510…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/F6907510FB51EAE545E22FB33C0E495B6C6C4CDF9D27FE880B39727F2EBF35E3) | | CORAL/PEARL | [639E661F…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/639E661F220F6F4B6F9FBB63C6D46058CE887C1655CB69A13663D74BFAE4199E) | | JADE/ONYX | [A32CE06C…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/A32CE06CA0810D70710350E665D69212A18F3468C0E4F33B56173F54A151233F) | | UST1/cUSTC | [51F2AFD9…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/51F2AFD985721CD7CA7EBC6EAD156080833CA21F4E511A9367B9BF1511CC3056) | | UST1/USTR | [F321D88D…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/F321D88D44196F77DB8232FAD6EF5E03CD334EF3CE0BA8F722A4981D50FE91AE) | | cLUNC/UST1 | [D954133B…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/D954133B56C2D79D87A7167924362E5C04CFAD8C9A9415FC18BADBC33A0EBA8E) | | factory `UpdateConfig { pair_code_id: 11580 }` | [B5DA613F…](https://finder.terraclassic.community/columbus-5/tx/B5DA613F6D2B10EB52E92743EBAE1B01376F412011ED791EB32ACEFC127CEDEB) | ### Remaining (frontend) - Rebuild Coolify `dex.cl8y.com` from `main` so `/tiers` **Limit place** and Trade maker-fee copy match T9 = 0. - After rebuild: registered T9 place should show `maker_fee_amount` = 0; same wallet pool/hybrid swap `effective_fee_bps` = 9; unregistered place/take still 90 bps. Deploy trace copy: #391

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 22:29:44 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

mentioned in issue #391

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-15 22:36:08 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

Coolify frontend check (dex.cl8y.com) — 2026-08-15 UTC

Production /tiers is serving the !1058 UI against live LCD GetTiers.

Row	Discount	Eff. Fee (swap/take)	Limit place
No tier	—	1.8%	0.90% (90 bps)
Tier 9 (7.5K CL8Y)	95%	0.09% (9 bps)	0%

Copy: “Limit-order placement uses a deeper discount (tier 9 is 0). Taking or swapping still uses the swap discount.” HTML last-modified 2026-08-15 22:24:42 GMT; chunk TiersPage-CV-BSmL5.js.

On-chain migrate (code 11581 / 11580) already verified in the previous note. No remaining #514 ops.

Optional later (not this issue): a live T9 place_limit_order to confirm maker_fee_amount=0 in events. LCD GetDiscount for terra12z8vz3… already returns limit_discount_bps=10000.

## Coolify frontend check (dex.cl8y.com) — 2026-08-15 UTC Production `/tiers` is serving the !1058 UI against live LCD `GetTiers`. | Row | Discount | Eff. Fee (swap/take) | Limit place | |-----|----------|----------------------|-------------| | No tier | — | 1.8% | **0.90%** (90 bps) | | Tier 9 (7.5K CL8Y) | 95% | **0.09%** (9 bps) | **0%** | Copy: “Limit-order placement uses a deeper discount (tier 9 is 0). Taking or swapping still uses the swap discount.” HTML `last-modified` 2026-08-15 22:24:42 GMT; chunk `TiersPage-CV-BSmL5.js`. On-chain migrate (code 11581 / 11580) already verified in the previous note. No remaining #514 ops. Optional later (not this issue): a live T9 `place_limit_order` to confirm `maker_fee_amount=0` in events. LCD `GetDiscount` for `terra12z8vz3…` already returns `limit_discount_bps=10000`.

PlasticDigits commented

2026-08-16 08:43:17 +00:00

(Migrated from gitlab.com)

mentioned in issue #532