Whitelisting tokens

Only whitelist a tokens if
a) it is a real token
b) it is already trading on dutchX at the “right” price

Look up all trading pairs here: https://visualx.d.exchange/#/dashboard

A few comments on whitelisting tokens.

First of all it is important to understand what the whitelist is needed for. In general anyone can add any token to trading on dutchX (on smart contract level). So a token does not need to be whitelisted to be traded on dutchX. However - such a token would not generate any MGN. (The MGN token is basically a reward token of the dutchX and gives those who have a lot a slight trading advantage over those who have less/ none)

Is the token real?
For MGN it is necessary to have a whitelist because otherwise I could e.g. just create a “fake” Martin-token where I own 100% of the supply. Now I would just trade those Martin-tokens against ETH and earn a lot of MGN.

What is the right starting price?
However - even if the token is “real” there is one more issue: Usually the starting price of an auction is defined by the closing price of the last auction. However - for the first auction whoever adds the token can define any starting price. If a token is in reality worth $1 of ETH they could just set the starting price instead to $1,000,000,000. No the system would credit them tons of MGN for selling tokens because the system thinks this would be a ton of trading volume.

At the time of writing there are 2 interfaces to the dutchX: https://slow.trade and https://fairdex.net. Please note that those are centrally controlled and have their own logic about what tokens they display. Thus being whitelisted does not necessarily mean that it will show up in those interfaces. The dxDAO could fork one of those interfaces and create a version that automatically shows all tokens that are whitelisted.


I think what Martin mentioned about Interfaces is really interesting and should be one of the first projects the dxd should fund => Forking slow.trade and/or Fair.dex to enable users to trade all the tokens currently listed on the DutchX and not only those pre-selected by the UI hosts due to legal concerns.

Most ERC20s have 2 problems in common:

  1. It is costly for them to get listed on high volume centralized or permissioned decentralized exchanges and
  2. they are highly illiquid, making large trades on regular order book exchanges infeasible.

The DutchX addresses both of these problems by providing permissionless listing and ~6h auctions where a fair market price is more likely to be found for larger trades than on order books.

Problem though: The organizations hosting the current interfaces are not receiving compensation and are hence not incentivized to take on the legal risk of allowing regular users to trade ERC20s which might be subject to security law infringement or other legal uncertainties (which most of them are, lets face it).


I would personally vote on a project which forks Slow.trade and / or Fair.dex, hosts it via ENS / IPFS and transfers the ownership to the dxDAO. This would finally enable traders to buy & sell illiquid tokens in larger amounts on the DutchX in a user-friendly manner, which is not currently possible anywhere else to my knowledge.

1 Like

I totally agree with you and this should be the highest priority the dxDAO should focus in the short term. We got gifted with a protocol and frontends, lets go all in decentralisation because it seems like the dxDAO is the only company which can easily achieve it.