Create CREAM Listing Team


Create an elected group that will manage the asset listing process to improve research and security of incoming assets, reduce governance overhead, and expedite implementation. This will onboard more collateral to increase TVL and fees.


This proposal comes from the confusion and friction I’ve heard and personally experienced had seen in listing new assets. It’s hard for teams trying to list their asset on Cream to know:

  • What are the requirements for getting listed? (liquidity, age, security audits, etc.)

  • What is the whole process is to get listed and how long until my asset is implemented? (also seems most don’t know that they need to do a 2nd vote to be able to take out loans on their asset)

  • Who do I go to for advice on getting listed and engaging the community?

  • How do I get a vote up if I don’t have sufficient CREAM? ($300k is steep requirement even for active CREAM members like me)

CREAM started out as the “fast and scrappy” but listings have started to fall behind compared to speed that tokens are being released on the market. With the addition of LP tokens to the platform the risk of some of these assets is bigger but it also provides a larger market to capture so we need a faster and more reliable process for adding new and high quality assets to the platform This is even more true with the financialization of the NFT market where we could list NFTX LPs, Charged Particles NFTs with embedded ERC20s, or other primitives being released.

The listing team will serve a couple of important functions for the CREAM community:

  • Single point of contact for teams to get information and advice on listing assets

  • Trusted group of advisors for CREAM community to vet tokens and make sure they don’t pose a risk to the platform

  • Streamlined and expedited process for listing assets

  • Potentially collaborate with other protocols like Aave and Maker on our collateral research efforts

Governance Details

The listing team should be like the Spartan council - an elected group with complete autonomy to list assets based on the team’s research. Each team member would receive an NFT that gives them 1 vote. The team must make a unanimous decision on all parameters - interest rate model, collateral factor, and reserve factor - in order to be listed.

Given that almost all proposals need to go through the CREAM team anyway due to the extremely high costs of acquiring the 1,500 tokens required to create a Snapshot vote this doesn’t actually change the listing process all that much, just make it more explicit and expedited.

One key change to governance by adding the listing team would be to revert this proposal that requires all new tokens start at 0% collateral. While a good safety measure it adds lots of friction and governance overhead to the listing process and the precaution won’t be necessary if we have a dedicated team to ensuring quality tokens and appropriate collateral before listing.

Note: This is just a listing team, anyone can create a proposal to delist or change asset parameters at anytime

Note: This listing team only applies to the ETH platform not the BSC platform which will continue as is.


Open question to CREAM core team - Am I missing any implementation details for listing an asset? I can’t find anything in the docs about which contract/EOA has control over adding/changing assets on the platform



Create a listing team of elected members that has complete autonomy to list new asset


Do nothing - Keep listing governance as is


I do like the idea of a listing team to help reduce the friction. However, I am not particularly a fan of the full autonomy. I definitely would appreciate their analysis and positioning to remove the 2 step listing process. Also, a specific source to provide guidance is important.

What is wrong with autonomy? And how is that different from the current system where 94% of all proposals are initiated and passed by the core team (source Snaphsot) which doesn’t include all the decisions that don’t even go through governance?

The members of the listing team are always able to be voted out at any time as per Spartan Council spec so there is accountability. And as I mentioned “This is just a listing team, anyone can create a proposal to delist or change asset parameters at anytime” so their decisions aren’t final.


Yeah, i am not a fan of that by the core team either. However, i do understand it. I think there should be the ability to agree on “executive actions” by designated individuals. If the addition/removal is per Spartan Council Spec, then i would be with it because there is still a direct lever of control.

1 Like

Thank you for this, @Kiba! You’ve been a fantastic supporter since the beginning days of our community.

I strongly support this, and have been talking with some qualified folks for this. Let’s start discussing potential candidates for this.


Thanks Lumberg, I know i can be a troll sometimes but I try to contribute as well haha.

I was thinking a 5 person team - 2 from CREAM, 2 community members, and 1 from another lending protocol or some related DeFi project to share research and methodologies. This is small enough to be agile and large/diverse enough to have contrary opinions for good discussions.