But over time, a few things became clear. The token model didn’t really reward participation. Protocol fees weren’t being used effectively. Governance slowed down. The system worked, but wasn’t doing enough to support growth or activity.

So the team and I started exploring a possible relaunch. We’ve been calling it Revolv, a fresh start with a new name and new token, RVLV, along with a governance model based on vote-locked RVLV, or veRVLV. It’s not live, and nothing is finalised yet, but we’ve got a few ideas we’re excited about.

A Bribe Marketplace

One of the first features we’re planning is a permissionless bribe marketplace.

Anyone, whether a project or an individual user, will be able to offer bribes to voters in exchange for support. If a project wants more rewards directed to their pool, they can post a bribe. If you're a voter, you can choose where to vote based on which pools are offering the best incentives.

We think this creates a more open and competitive system. It also gives newer or smaller pools a chance to attract attention without needing to directly pay liquidity providers.

Yield Accelerated Pools

Another feature we want to introduce is Yield Accelerated Pools.

These pools automatically deposit the underlying assets into external strategies that generate yield. The yield earned is used to boost RVLV rewards for liquidity providers. So LPs don’t just earn liquidity rewards, they get a share of that extra yield too.

Our first integration will be with Meridian Lend, the main lending protocol on Telos. We’ll likely add more options as we go.

Putting Protocol Fees to Work

In Symmetric, fees mostly just left the system. They didn’t really benefit token holders or support long-term growth. With Revolv, we want to change that.

All protocol fees, which include those from swaps, bribes, flash loans, and yield, would be used to buy RVLV from the open market. Instead of burning those tokens or storing them in a treasury, we would use them to fund bribes in the marketplace and provide additional rewards to liquidity providers.

Here’s how it works. If a pool is generating activity and earning fees, the protocol buys RVLV and uses it to fund bribes targeting voters who supported that pool. This means that active pools naturally attract more votes, which directs more emissions their way. It creates a feedback loop that encourages participation and rewards the people keeping the protocol active.

A Simpler Approach to ve-Governance

One thing we’d like to change in a relaunch is the governance model. In Symmetric, veSYMM required users to lock an 80/20 LP token. 80% tSYMM and 20% wTLOS. The idea was to combine governance and liquidity.

It made sense at first, but it had a serious downside. When tSYMM came under sell pressure, veSYMM holders ended up being the exit liquidity. Their LP tokens were locked, and they couldn’t adjust their positions or protect themselves.

For veRVLV, we’d take a much simpler approach. Governance would be based on locking plain RVLV, without any LP exposure. This gives users more control and removes the risks that came with being tied to an illiquid or volatile pair.

Fixing the Token Supply Model

Another issue with Symmetric was how the token supply was handled. tSYMM followed a fixed supply schedule with a hard cap of 20 million tokens. Emissions were set to halve every four years, which might sound reasonable at first, but it caused a few problems in practice.

Most of the emissions happened early on, which led to a lot of tSYMM being farmed and dumped when the protocol was still getting off the ground. Governance had no control over the rate of emissions, and there was no flexibility to slow things down or redirect incentives when market conditions changed.

For RVLV, we want to take a different approach.

Rather than having ongoing emissions, the full supply will be minted from day one. There won’t be any future minting, so the supply will be capped from the start. Of that supply, around 5.5 million RVLV tokens (the same amount of tSYMM that was still sitting in the Symmetric treasury) will be set aside specifically for liquidity rewards.

veRVLV holders will vote on how quickly these rewards are distributed. That could be on a bi-monthly or quarterly schedule, depending on what governance decides. This gives the community much more control over emissions and avoids the kind of runaway dilution we saw before.

The goal is to reward participation, but in a way that’s coordinated and responsive, rather than locked into a schedule that can’t adapt.

What Happens to Existing Holders

If we move ahead with Revolv, the plan is to make sure existing Symmetric users are fairly included.

Anyone holding at least 10 tSYMM will receive veRVLV on a 1-to-1 basis. These tokens will be locked for one year. This airdrop also covers the tSYMM portion for liquidity providers who were in the 80/20 tSYMM-wTLOS pool.

On top of that, LPs will be reimbursed for the wTLOS they had in the pool before the compromise. So between the veRVLV airdrop and the wTLOS reimbursement, both parts of their original position are being accounted for.

I know the one-year lock might seem a bit restrictive, but I believe it gives the protocol the stability it needs in the early stages. It also creates a stronger foundation for value to build. With buybacks from protocol fees and swap fees being directed to veRVLV holders through the bribe system, I think the return on those locked tokens will be meaningful over time.

This is about setting things up properly, not just for launch, but for the long run.

Looking Ahead

Revolv isn’t live. It’s just something the team and I have been working through based on what we’ve learned so far. The structure feels better. It’s simpler, easier to maintain, and more aligned with the people actually using the protocol.

We’re still shaping the details, but this is the direction we’re excited about. Just wanted to share where we’re at.

– Stee