The Division

Hi guys, so recently within the THORChain’s community, there’s been a debate or should I say a division? between people who want THORChain devs to continue developing ThorFi and people who want THORChain devs to focus only on the initial idea of integrating chains and growing TVL.

What is ThorFi? Not to bore you with technical mumbo jumbo, it’s the part of THORChain that enables users to collaterize assets to obtain loan, allows for stable coin and other additional operations that offer more than just L1 non custodial swaps.

For me, it’s like a no brainer, continue developments on ThorFi while still integrating other chains and attracting TVL. If the devs are being overwhelmed with work, then hire more hands, THORChain has the reserves for this. So obviously it seems like I’m on the progressives side but what are these traditionalists and what is their motivation.

The “Traditionalists”

The traditionalists in the THORChain community argue from a point of purity and focus. They believe that the core value and attraction of THORChain lie in its ability to provide secure, decentralized swaps across different blockchains without needing a custodian.

Their concern is that by expanding into ThorFi and its associated features, THORChain might dilute its original purpose, potentially compromising security and efficiency in pursuit of broader functionality.

They argue that the beauty of THORChain, and indeed what attracted many to it in the first place, was its simplicity and direct approach to solving a very specific problem in the crypto space: making cross-chain swaps as easy and trustless as possible.

Adding layers of complexity with ThorFi, they fear, could not only distract the developers but also introduce new vectors for attacks or exploits that could harm the chain's reputation and reliability.

The “Progressives”

On the flip side, the Progressives, whom I find myself aligning with, see ThorFi as a natural evolution of the platform. The world of DeFi is rapidly evolving and standing still might mean getting left behind.

They argue that ThorFi's features such as lending, borrowing, and stablecoin support are the next steps in ensuring THORChain remains relevant and continues to grow in utility and user base.

Moreover, they point out that the introduction of ThorFi could bring in new users, increase the chain's TVL, and, by extension, secure its position in the increasingly competitive DeFi space.

They also highlight that the blockchain world is inherently about innovation and adaptation; by branching out into ThorFi, THORChain is merely staying true to the ethos of the crypto world.

From my perspective, the fear of dilution of focus and potential security risks are valid. However, the crypto world has always been about pushing boundaries.

If THORChain can manage to expand its featureset without compromising on its core offerings, then why not? After all, the ability to adapt and innovate is what keeps a project alive in the fast-paced world of cryptocurrency.

But Wait! 2 Years Ago….here’s what happened

Interesting thing is how this same debate was had about 2 years ago, of which at that time, the bane of the discussion was about launching the ThorFi’s stable coin TOR, this time around, it was about the ability to stake RUNE and earn yield on it which to me is another no brainer.

Interesting thing is how this same debate was had about 2 years ago, of which at that time, the bane of the discussion was about launching the ThorFi’s stable coin TOR, this time around, it was about the ability to stake RUNE and earn yield on it which to me is another no brainer.

Over 2 years now we have nothing on TOR, it seems like a part of the community is drawing everyone back and it’s become annoying and tiring.

I remember when I first stumbled upon THORChain, drawn by its ambitious goal to make cross-chain swaps seamless and efficient. It was thrilling to be part of a community that was on the frontier of solving a significant challenge in the crypto space.

Yet, as I've grown with the community, my understanding of what THORChain could be has also evolved. It's not more than a tool for swapping, it's a platform that could fundamentally change how we interact with DeFi.

Is It Time To Fork THORChain?

What's frustrating, though, is seeing how internal division can slow down this evolution. The debate over ThorFi and its features like staking RUNE for yield is a perfect example. It's not just about adding new bells and whistles to the platform; it's about responding to the community's needs and the market's direction.

If there's one thing I've learned from being in the crypto space, it's that adaptability is key. Projects that fail to evolve based on user feedback and market trends often find themselves left behind.

Moreover, the argument that focusing on ThorFi would dilute THORChain's purpose overlooks the fact that the crypto ecosystem is more interconnected than ever. Offering a suite of DeFi services doesn't distract from the project's core it enhances it by making it more versatile and valuable to users.

The lead dev hinted on Twitter that splitting THORChain at this point is being explored, this is something I highly welcome. So, while the debate rages on, I'll be here, watching, waiting, and supporting THORChain in whatever direction it takes. After all, it's this passionate community and groundbreaking technology that drew me in, and I'm not going anywhere. Let's keep pushing the boundaries, together.

Kindly share your thoughts in the comments below.

Posted Using InLeo Alpha