if you mean that it needs multiple assets as a reserve/collateral then that just makes everything more complex when there is already ways to keep the price on peg.
And backing a decentralized asset with fiat is only a nonsense that Ethereum people are able to come up with, but that's pretty much the best choice they can do when they have liquidations.
Bonded Stablecoins have no margin calls, no liquidations.
Then they’re just bounded assets rather then stablecoins. Asset which is not sustainable is not entitled to be called stable. Third and reliable party that would secure reserve could mitigate liquidation problem. Why do you think no market has shown any interest to them so far. In my view because of mentioned reason - they are just not stable, by and large.
Because people like you spread nonsense. What bounded assets? They are called Bonded stablecoins, like bonding curve. Use actual words.
Version 1 was stable enough, version 2 is even more stable.
Haven't calculated how many percentages of GBYTE supply is put into Bonded Stablecoins now, but it reached 1% already in October, just month after launch. Back then only 0.25% of total supply worth was in liquidity mining, but today that number is well over 1%
https://liquidity.obyte.org/That's not bad result, all of Ethereum DeFi captures only 8% of ETH supply
https://www.blockchaincenter.net/cockpit/stats/show/dim=defi,dim2=undefined,met=lockedeth;,filter=,labelfilter=,timeslug=week,datatypes=chart,startdate=,enddate=