wollemiPine I'm 100% for this, for several reasons:
Firstly, the lineup of contributors/advisors is self-evidently accomplished. I've seen these community members repeatedly deliver on many features and many protocols in the entire web3 ecosystem, even while anonymous. Any one of us can look them up and not only find irrefutable evidence that they are builders, but we can also find many cases where they helped others and demonstrated through action that they are community-first. Speaking from experience, I realize at this point we need to amplify the leaders in web3 that can handle stressful situations, troubleshoot systemic issues before they manifest, and perform well-practiced due diligence on new web3 systems without playing around with zero-sum tokenomics and risk.
Secondly, the value add in web3 is not necessarily a first-order consequence. Olympus does have a difficult choice in many cases of necessarily refusing to hand out capital just because there's intuitive deep value (or other externalities).
On the other hand, the ecOHMsystem does not necessarily grow in scale or develop in scope just because we attract consumer or institutional demand. In order to truly grow in all dimensions, it is necessary to cultivate sustainable growth in the form of developer talent and well-known practices behind the most fundamental hyperstructures in web3. In 2021, we all saw what happened in fork season. I would rather prefer that it had been this sort of enterprise.
Thirdly, as the proposal states, we do deserve better. In this econOHMy, we need to emphasize cohesiveness and coordination, and that starts with building vertically on top of Olympus, instead of the bull market "shotgun" strategy of creating many disparate protocols that only marginally support this community. My hope is that this proposal reflects the permanent ethos of Artemis Academy, insofar as it emphasizes producing bootcamps, educational events, student sponsorships & mentorships for the Ohmies.
Finally, what's the point to repeating the old and obsolete? Olympus succeeded in bootstrapping in 2021, but we are where we are. Are OIPs limited to dealing with the same actors, the same DeFi, and the same risks? Now is the best time to be sincerely nimble, and think about how the Olympus12 can be reinforced through new strategies. This proposal leverages industry experience, due diligence, and a selective framework to deliver capital to one of the most fundamental +EV endpoints: new developers, working on new primitives. This is how we win (again). Moreover, this proposal stresses that it is OHM-centric. Moving forward, Olympus should reinforce that it is not a hedge fund, and it doesn't give out charity to external organization with the discretion to pivot away from (and dump) this decentralized reserve currency.
The vision for Artemis was germinated from within Olympus. Finding, attracting, and retaining top Web3 talent that not only performs, but also does so in an ethical manner has become extremely rare. The Olympus community, more, the entire DeFi and Web3 communities deserve better. The strength of any organization is determined by its people.
This is ambitious, but necessary. We should definitely consider it, or we may end up following the recent path of the protocols and degens who have rugged themselves.