• Proposal

  • OIP-49: Olympus Give Lighthouse Partnership with Gitcoin

I fully support the initiative and also think the ROI we get from this initiative is less measured in terms of funding flowing back, but how Olympus is perceived in terms of credibility and long-term sustainability will be positively impacted by this OIP! Also, it enables to use OHM as a funding vehicle for non DeFi Assets which is a big plus.

Voted against because otherwise we'll be voting on dishing out the treasury to anyone who comes with a need for liquidity. Let's not turn ourselves into the uni grants program (which has been a total shitshow)

    These should be projects building on top of OHM and donating staking gains at best, treasury is for backing the protocol, not for charity. We SHOULD have some charitable program though funded through OHMies who want to contribute personally.

    here is an alternative: a better feature is a PoolTogether type pool for sOHM which users can enter like the 3,3 together pool that donates rebases to charity for the lock period instead of a random winner in the pool.

      I’m against OIP-50 because Olympus Dao is not charity and we don’t want to open a door for individual to siphon money out of the treasury.

      As a point of clarification, the request is to initiate utilization of the Olympus Give infrastructure for DAO OHM. This does not relate to the treasury as these are funds used for contributors or marketing efforts and strategic partnerships.

      The DAO currently holds 955k OHM. The aforementioned request is 0.06% (6bps) of the current DAO holdings. Only 2bps would be “non-recoverable.”

      https://etherscan.io/address/0x245cc372C84B3645Bf0Ffe6538620B04a217988B

      Additionally, the $300k notional is a no-loss, non-custodial redirection of yield. The DAO will recoup the requested OHM and Gitcoin will only receive rebases.

      ptp1600 fundamentally this is the architecture of Olympus Give. This activity is to highlight its power and our strength in the ecosystem.

      Again, this proposal does not affect the backing of OHM or allow users access to the treasury.

          helkem0 FrenDAO is another part of the Olympus ecosystem and will likely use the Olympus Give infrastructure.

          Olympus Give is intentionally extensible in this way. OlympusDAO seeks to highlight and bootstrap the calibration and framing of this open ended tool through a partnership with Gitcoin.

            Responding about "do this yourself" - that's exactly what Olympus Give will enable.

            From our original Tyche project spec:

            Background: Tyche is a system for lossless crowdfunding and yield redirection built on top of Olympus Tyche directs rebases from deposited sOHM to recipient addresses Can be used for various crowdfunding purposes without donors losing their principal

            Proposal: Tyche contract will allow Ohmies to deposit sOHM to donate rebase yields to anyone without losing their principal Donation recipients will be issued vault shares, akin to Yearn vault shares you may be familiar with sOHM inside this contract will accumulate rebases Recipients must redeem their shares for the deposited sOHM Donors will be able to withdraw their principal deposited sOHM at any time

            This proposal seeks to highlight and calibrate our community around a great use case and cause.

              Don_G_Lover To be clear I'm 100% in favor of Tyche, so long as Ohmies are donating their own yield. It's when yields from the DAO, or the treasury, or any source other than an individual's own bags, are used that I have an issue.

              Tyche is awesome, but it's awesome precisely because it enables individuals to opt-in of their own volition and with their own yield/funds.

                Against this. Why go this route when the same or similar objectives can by accomplished using Tyche?

                Don_G_Lover Hmm sounds like I need to read things more closely, thank you. Though, I do think the $500k match from OlympusDAO is better done later if at all.

                  Maybe this should be reposted with clarification bolded and option to not have $500k match specifically

                  As someone who has been here since the start, I don’t understand why we’re turning the DAO of the decentralized reserve currency into a charity giveaway. Feels like the DAO should focus on compensating and retaining DAO talent before turning into a charity where everyone wants to get their hands on treasury funds. I do not support this.

                  Hello friends. I am in support of this proposal but I see the backlash its getting, so let me explain my reasoning and potential ways forward.

                  I see why the community might be against the DAO setting a precedent for supporting certain causes. I can see why this might ruffle some feathers, as some of these issues can be "political". If that is the case, then we should have the community decide what causes we should match and for how much.

                  But is the community against funding Gitcoin, period? I think this would be a worse precedent than just doing the donation. This ecosystem does not run by complete self-interest. So much of the infrastructure and tooling that lets us devs actually learn and develop was funded by generous donors via Gitcoin. To think that we owe nothing back is ridiculous. Even from the most cynical view, donating to Gitcoin is a huge marketing boost for us, and would hopefully encourage other DAOs to do the same. If you agree, then AT THE VERY LEAST you should support donating to tooling, education and infrastructure. Cultivating the ground you tread is not a political stance.

                  To add on, the creation of Tyche was so that we could allow the community to donate or raise funds for causes they care about. If the community would allow it, I hope we can find some amount that the DAO would match to qualifying causes that the community votes for.

                  Gonna need to echo the sentiment of most people above in that I am completely against this proposal.

                  We aren't a charity and this has nothing to do with our mission statement. It's a terrible precedent to set IMO, and the only thing we should incorporate is a way for individuals to allocate their own rewards.

                  If we want to get involved in something it needs to be directly and mutually beneficial--something like KLIMA bonds where our treasury grows while we show our support. Even then I'm not crazy about it due to their somewhat inflated current valuation, but it's at least something that would deliver returns for ohmies down the road.