One Stop Shop Bonding Curve Course

Jeff, thanks for the wonderful feedback.

I’d love to work together and make this more robust and pertinent to the TEC by bringing in solid data analysis.

I’m curious what the TEC community thinks of this.

Just want to echo Jeff here. The TEC has a lot of data from a year’s worth of operating an ABC. There are interesting questions around things like the interaction between the ABC and liquidity pools on Honeyswap and $WATER. Also, how has the token freeze affected holding behavior? There are many interesting questions, some of which could be of real guidance to the commons. How do the liquidity pools affect tribute income right now and in the future once transactional volume grows?

I personally don’t have a good sense for how a course on bonding curves fits in the overall stack of what the field needs right now. For something like this though, I’d want to see a lot more thought given to how to reach and engage students, which is why the Academy’s role feels very important for something like this. Without that additional work, this information just sits on a virtual shelf.

Where I’m going with this is whether there is an opportunity to redirect your energy into collaborating with @JeffEmmett and maybe @rex on doing some TEC ABC data analysis instead of the course. It might not be as big of a project, but I think it could be quite useful to the commons, and my sense is that you would probably get a lot out of it.

Thanks for making this proposal and getting this conversation on ABCs going, @curiousrabbit.eth.


Thanks for taking the time Gideon. Those are fair points.

I think a bonding curve course could help the space recognize and utilize their importance in designing new market structures. I hear you loud and clear about the TEA, i would love for them to take my finished work and create the course on their LMS out of it.

Im definitely open to working with Jeff & Rex on the TEC ABC data analysis, although data analysis is not my strong suit, i can model it in machinations and assist them. It would serve a different purpose then the BC course.

I’m curious what i should do with this proposal? does it require more time or feedback before the next step or is the community asking for something different 🤷🏼

Would love any guidance from the TEC

1 Like

Hello @curiousrabbit.eth! Seems like you got some people interested :smiley:! Definitely looking forward to see some work and analysis on our bonding curve.

About the proposal, we usually leave proposals for ~1 week for advice process. Given that time has passed already, you can go ahead and post it for voting on our Gardens.

Thanks @enti i appreciate the direction. ill touch base with @JeffEmmett & @rex see how we might spice this up to be more relevant to the TEC and ill post it afterwards.

In the meantime, happy to have people continue to discuss or be explicit about what they’d like to see

1 Like

Thanks for the feedback @gideonro and @enti! Perhaps we will hear more from a few other TEC community members here on the forum, but in the meantime why don’t we plan a catch-up call sometime next week between @curiousrabbit.eth, @rex, @ygg_anderson and myself to discuss the opportunities of this proposal.

What is our time zone spread looking like? I believe ygg is in PST, I’m in EST, @rex and @curiousrabbit.eth how about you?


sounds good @JeffEmmett, shall we do the catch up call in the TEC discord, for anyone that wants to attend?

would love to hear from more TEC members as well

I’m EST…for now :smirk:

What day would be convenient for everyone?

Hey all! I’ve stayed quiet for this proposal. I certainly see the proposal being more useful to token engineers than quite a few we have passed in the recent past. I would love to see this idea be developed, in whichever shape and form it ends up being.

Regarding data - we recently ported all the Dune queries over to V2, so we have somewhere to work from; that being said, we’ve only scratched the surface with what can be done there. There’s still a lot to do with recouping and making poignant visualisations and evaluation on how the bonding curve has behaved.

My timezone’s GMT, by the way.


T @rex thanks for joining the party, lets arrange something for next week, perhaps coordination on telegram is easiest

So for the meeting next week we have

@JeffEmmett EST
@rex GMT
@ygg_anderson PST
@curiousrabbit.eth EST

we have an 8hour time diff between @rex & @ygg_anderson , so lets say our timeslot is to find a day, between
9am-1pm PST,
which is 5pm-9pm GMT
which is 12-4pm EST

let me know some times that work for yall, or maybe theres a better place to organize this meeting lol :joy:


Since there is a reasonable amount of data on operating the ABC with the TEC, my suggestion would be to have an evaluation of its achievements against stated objectives or vision. So the first point would be what were the stated objectives? And how have they fallen short (or have they)? Can it be rectified?

Teaching Bonding Curves at any level should be within the scope of the TE Academy and they have an excellent seed course along with a vibrant community discussing and beginning to apply ABCs at all levels of complexity.

IMO one flaw in the first implementation is there is no mechanism for benchmarking the intrinsic value of the $TEC against fundamentals: the way it happens in TradFi (quarterly earnings, EPS/PE estimation…). Which is ironical when the Blockchain ecosystem is known for its transparency, quality and wealth of data it creates. See the Messari Crypto 2023 report. These metrics would be useful both for internal target setting and evaluation by external entities.


5 pm to 9 pm GMT is 10:30 pm-2:30 am for us in South Asia. Will be worse for folks from the Far East and Australasia - if you would want us to attend. But happy to watch/readthe recording/report.

Hey Friends,

We had a meeting today between @rex @JessicaZartler @ygg_anderson @curiousrabbit.eth @JeffEmmett

Please see the recording for your own entertainment (PG13): curious rabbit's Zoom Meeting - Zoom

We will be holding weekly meetings between us, and working a-synchronistically to create an updated proposal that integrates the feedback received and provides a new strategy forward that is easier to fund and potentially more useful to the TEC. Around bonding curves of course!

Expected date for that new proposal is in 2-3 weeks time.

Excited to see this evolve! :blue_heart:


I think, in principle, that the course is a good idea. I have three comments that I would like to share:

  1. Courses are an extremely valuable part of a traditional engineering education, because they include not only (open loop) presentation of the concepts, but also (closed loop) feedback on how well someone understands the material. They include experiences which are objectively verifiable, as well as opportunities for open discussion and reflection, giving the learner a sense of embodied confidence and ownership in the material.

A well-curated reading list can be part of a great course (I learned this from @JessicaZartler), but it is not a substitute. It’s totally OK if this group ends up being a research focus (yay research!), but the practice of actually doing basic Calculus to calculate price needs to be addressed at some point as a crucial part of the TE skill stack. Courses like “Basics of Augmented Bonding Curves” are desperately needed, in my view.

  1. In terms of value, I think the quoted price is extremely generous to the TEC. If you look at the experience and credentials of the course authors, it is basically a dream team in terms of skills and diverse experience (including math, coding, data analysis, writing, video production, social media promotion, etc.) Compare to something like 10K/seat for a one week Systems Dynamics Bootcamp at MIT. Offering this as a public and freely available good at the quoted price for labor is extremely benevolent of everyone involved.

Of course, this depends on the exact deliverables. As with any other project, it will be important to have precise scope.

  1. I’m sad to think that Mr. Rabbit may have felt any need to dox himself for credibility in this space. I also felt a need to dox myself for credibility, and there are times I regret doing so. Regardless of our personal decisions, I hope the TEC can create a culture where government names and primate faces are not expected, and newcomers understand that. Privacy is the ultimate public good, and many crypto people under thirty simply don’t have any interest in providing traditional identity data.

Thanks for proposing this @curiousrabbit.eth and good luck to @JessicaZartler @JeffEmmett @ygg_anderson @rex I look forward to seeing what you come up with, and learning more about the topic! :slightly_smiling_face:


Thank you for your thoughtful words Mr Octopus


Recording from our group meeting yesterday: curious rabbit's Zoom Meeting - Zoom

TLDR: we will have an updated version of this proposal out soon (1-2 weeks)

i believe it will do a great job integrating the comments, the needs/desires of the TEC and driving forward the original mission of the proposal.

Warm regards everyone and thank you for the continued interest


Hey Friends, Here is the updated proposal! :partying_face:

I was unable to edit the first post on the forum

In principle this proposal has merit but I concur with TEC community members expressing skepticism as it is heavy on academic research and light on application that would optimize value creation for TEC.

Applied research approach in my view should be prominent to justify the funds requested, replete with a hard commitment for innovative prototypes designed and developed, bonding curve models integrated into a value creating TEC offering to external parties wishing to deploy bonding curves in their tokenized ecosystems, and code and documentation available in a TEC community GitHub repository.

Hi @DecentralizeSDGs, not sure if you had a chance to see the revised proposal that Rabbit linked above, but here are a couple relevant sections to the value creation topic that you are requesting.

Planned Deliverables & Outcomes:

  1. We will create a series of digestible, shareable social media content on bonding curves, some of the topics including:
  • Different types & structures (Constant Product, First Order, Second Order, Primary, Secondary, ARMMs, Stableswap, Curve)
  • Bonding Curve use cases & benefits, how they solve problems
  • Case Studies (Truebit, Aavegotchi DAO, TEC)
  • The mathematics of different bonding curves
  • Machination Simulations
  • Python & cadCAD simulations of bonding curves, & benefits of simulation
  1. Provide deeper analysis of the TEC Augmented Bonding Curve, including suggestions for updated Dune Analytics dashboards and python integrations
  2. Aim to create a sustainable flywheel for further R&D on Bonding Curves through attracting deal flow and new grant opportunities for this research group and the TEC in general
  3. Structuring future research questions and further lines of inquiry to continue this research & education initiative.

What Success Looks Like:

  • 6 social media content posts, digestible and thought provoking
  • Posts have community traction, bringing in new leads and interest into the TEC
  • Upgraded Dune analytics board for the TEC ABC
  • Improved methodology for analyzing Bonding Curves on-chain data
  • Other unanticipated positive externalities discovered through research

Hi @linuxiscool I had reviewed the proposal and in my view the indicators of success listed need to be further fleshed with more concrete details as to the expected outcomes to justify the funds requested. For example, and to assist in your understanding of my view, the first two success indicators are communications related and subjective as there is no objective measurement of terms such as “digestible” and “thought provoking”. The third indicator to upgrade Dune analytics board for the TEC ABC is quite open ended and does not provide any technical specifications as to what this upgrade will exactly entail. The remaining two success indicators could also be further defined to avoid subjective terms such as “improved” without providing a firm baseline and goal upon which the anticipated “improvement” will be measured.

Trust the foregoing clarifies my perspective and is helpful in bolstering the overall proposal.

Two Comments:

  1. Upon posting to Gardens, our team realized that the gardens proposal description pulls from the forum post, and that forum posts are not editable after a set time period. Thus to avoid confusion, we had to create a new forum post and a new gardens proposal to update the proposal content body.
  1. I want to honour the comments that @DecentralizeSDGs have made above and carry the discussion into the new forum post. I’ll leave some time in case @DecentralizeSDGs wants to copy comments to the new post and reference to here, otherwise, I’ll go ahead an continue the discussion there and reference to the above. Apologies for any inconvenience. I appreciate the time taken to provide feedback.
1 Like