I think there are several challenges with this proposal and how it was presented to the community.
1. Perception: The name of the proposal and the way it was presented give the impression that the DAO (or at least core DAO members) are behind and supportive of the proposal. This is obviously not the case, but key people outside the community believe it to be, and this presents a PR problem.
2. Putting the Cart (Tactics) Before the Horse (Strategy): Several key people in the conversation, including Wartull and cpt_zeke, have talked about the strategic reasons why creating a DEX or other mechanisms where OHM is at the center of trading activity is good long-term for the protocol. And there are good arguments for why this should be the case. However, in a consensus building process, I believe it is best to create consensus around the strategy and need for this approach before suggesting specific tactics.
For example, if core people in the DAO think that it is vital for OHM to begin considering ways to embed itself deeper into the DeFi ecosystem by having OHM be a major trading pair, then a conversation should be created where the community gets a chance to discuss whether this is possible, and agree that from a strategic perspective this makes sense. Then a vote could be held codifying this strategic focus and putting some mechanisms in place to investigate the best way to do this, which can include going to existing collaborators, such as Sushi to discuss a path forward. After this reporting back on findings and then having recommendations about the best way to proceed.
The issue with this proposal is that the sound strategic reasons for taking this approach are being conflated with a specific tactical execution, which many people are uncomfortable with, given its mercenary and anti-collaborative tenor.
This is too important a strategic issue for the long-term health of the protocol to tie our horse to a tactical execution that may or may not drive a specific benefit.
And I've said this during many conversations internally at the DAO, there tends to be too much focus on tactical execution and not enough of a focus on the medium- to long-term strategic benefits/risks of actions taken by the DAO of late.
If people want to have a conversation about the best means of embedding OHM deeply into the DeFi ecosystem and making OHM a default trading pair, then I think that conversation should be had -- separate from having to make a decision about a specific tactical execution, which may or may not be the right one at this moment.
As for the risk/benefit to the protocol, sure Olympus could throw some liquidity into this, but the benefits should be well-defined, expected outcomes communicated, and what's expected from "partners" clear. Just because you can do something, does not mean that you should.
I recommend that this particular tactical decision be tabled and a new conversation about recommended strategies for making OHM a preferred trading pair, with minimal PR damage and preserving the collaborative, welcoming reputation Olympus is known for, should begin.
After the community has agreed that this is an important priority for the protocol, we should come back to discuss various ways to get there, including working with existing collaborators such as Sushi, or using existing levers, such as bonded liquidity, instead of moving in a radical direction too quickly.