Recent discussions by some providers on Flare about how the FIP.16 changes would destroy FTO accuracy are absurd, overwrought, and reek of narcissistic arrogance. The current primary price band is absurdly tight, and even the secondary bands are incredibly tight when talking about consensus pricing for assets that trade on hundreds of exchanges across all time-zones, with incredible variance in volumes (especially when considering true volume vs wash trade volume). Let's take the XRP price feed on a random round - Round 1306230. The Finalized price for that round was $1.33355 In order to be in the primary band, a DP had to supply a price of $1.33354-$1.33359. Now also, remember that border prices receive only 50% primary credit, so in reality to be considered a 100% primary band winner for that round, you would have to have supplied a price of $1.33355-$1.33358. That is a $0.00003 band width. Now, compare that to the TRUE price of XRP at that time...Oh wait, there is no true price of XRP at that time. Because every single price you see for an asset anywhere is based on either last trade, or an aggregation. So how important is it that a provider supply a price within that $0.00003 price range? 0% important. That exact finalized price could have been derived from any spread of provided prices, although the wider the actual submission spread, the more chance of "true" price drift. However the difference between $1.33354 and $1.33355 when it comes to actual applications of these price feeds is nonexistent. Yet, some incredibly arrogant providers would have you believe that anyone not providing a finalized price within that band is poisoning the oracle. This is ridiculously stupid. This also ignores the fact that if everyone provided exactly the same price, then every provider would only have 50% primary band accuracy because then every provider would be on the edge, just like happens often on the stablecoin feeds.. You see, believing that being in the primary band makes you superior is a fundamental misunderstanding of what makes a good oracle system. Chasing the perfect consensus price is actually worse for stability and reliability. A good oracle system needs a little diversity in methodology. Demanding that every single provider continue to progressively iterate and expand while incurring greater and greater costs is absurd. The secondary band for that Round on XRP was $1.33235-$1.33475 which is a spread of $0.0024 meaning that providers had to supply a price within $0.0012 of the consensus price to receive any rewards. That is HIGHLY accurate. As someone who runs products that actually use these price feeds, an "accuracy" within 0.09% of the consensus price is far far beyond the necessary accuracy for price feeds. Almost every single provider is hitting that secondary band over 90% of the time across all feeds. Not every provider needs to be a no-life enthusiast. Good enough is, in fact, good enough, and stability counts for far more than "accuracy." The FTSO system created by @FlareNetworks and @HugoPhilion is working incredibly well, with a proven track record of accuracy and stability. Don't listen to the alarmists. FIP.16 will in no way damage the FTSO.