Hey Wartull and everyone else
Long time OHMIE first time poster. I like the essence of this proposal but reading @LeTube comment above got me thinking and he does have a point …
In OIP-110 it was made clear that "Treasury wants to maximize veBAL controlled/ $ spent". A few months ago it probably was Aura but these days it definitely isnt, some napkin math makes it clear.
With security definitely not an issue for the alternatives (almost exact same arch) with other solutions actually being more transparent than Aura why are we taking a worse decision with treasury funds for our strategic Balancer investment???
Do the ohmies get some kind of airdrop from aura ? idk man seems sus.
As a side note - I always see other DAOs posting request for proposals from the ecosystem inviting the best to present their case for being selected, so professional! We never or rarely do that … I just dont understand why.
If we're to be taken seriously and not just considered a meme I think we could do more research and analytics work in public requesting RFPs (not backdoor deals) and generally collaborating as other blue chip DAO's do (Yearn, Synthetix, Maker DAO, Lido etc etc.) we're just as big if not bigger - we can do it!
With all that in mind I DONT support and will be voting against on snapshot for the simple reason that more research is needed. Were definitely not picking the option to "maximize veBAL controlled/ $ spent"!
full sentence linked below for reference:
"Governance power in the balancer ecosystem can be acquired through multiple different tokens, however Policy proposes to only focus on $BAL and $AURA as means of governance acquisition. Given that Treasury wants to maximize veBAL controlled/ $ spent, it should be agnostic and acquire the most efficient token."
