• Proposal

  • OIP-94A: Amend Interim Ranged Stability Policy Levers

I'm in favor of this amendment.
It's working as intended unfortunately the entirety of all markets are in one hell of a rut right now. Only so much everyone can do. I applaud the DAO and Policy teams for making the best out of the crappy situation.

Policy has executed incredibly well and IB has performed. The only open question for me given a lack of hard timelines for when range bound stability will launch is how much money from the treasury we ultimately think we're going to burn. Should there be a cap given an unbounded timeline?

I agree with Shpadoink and have no issue giving this authority to policy. That said, I think qualifying the burn and creating a cap before another amendment is needed would be prudent. Policy can even recommend what kind of capital budget this would require knowing when they feel Range Bound might be ready. Just fiscally conservative to not having something that is greenfield.

Otherwise, full steam ahead.

    I voted yes and please do as much as possible to increase my market capitalization percentage ownership !!!

    We are in favor. OIP-94 did exactly as it set out to do. Only suggestion would be to have some understanding of the capacity.

    Relwyn The amount OlympusDAO is willing to spend on inverse bonds is really dependent on the market. The goal for this OIP is not to fight the market, but to try to reach the moving average goal. In a neutral market capacity would be relatively low and consistent. However, in a depressed market where OHM's discount to its backing value is large then Olympus is more willing to capture that discount as its profitable.

      16 days later
      Write a Reply...