Would it ever make sense for the Assistance Fund to start holding a minor basket of stables along with HYPE? If a black swan were to happen and Hyperliquid faces an issue requiring repayment to users, and that repayment has to come from the Assistance Fund, an inevitably already suffering HYPE token will then need to be further liquidated to compensate hurt users and maintain integrity of the protocol--potentially an even worse scenario for HYPE Would a basket of stables be helpful in this instance? Maybe with USDH live, soon could be the time for the AF to begin accumulating USDH along with HYPE? USDH > USDC because USDH growth also means more HYPE being bought back, so the HYPE buybacks via fees generated can remain strong, but could just as well hold of basket of governance-approved stables (likely USDH, USDC, and USDT) Seems it would be helpful to have a nice $100m in stables along with the millions of HYPE to avoid needing to liquidate HYPE in a worst case--this could be built up over time without having much material impact on the dollar value of HYPE the AF buys every day Counterarguments I see: >Too complex to determine the actual basket of stables (governance pain) and adding third party risk via assets held in the AF >Potentially increases buy pressure on HYPE as speculators view this as a bullish decision on the part of HL, but also decreases AF buy pressure short term on a percentage basis >The sole asset of Hyperliquid should be HYPE and thus no other asset should be purchased by the AF >Even though the AF is said to be used for emergency situations, in reality it should remain a pure buyback system for HYPE first and foremost Just ideas I've been mulling over for long-term security of HL and support of HYPE, esp in wake of overall market downturn