krst It isn't righteous, it is pernicious, it is nothing but a cloak of righteousness. It corrupts the primary endeavor and I will vote against any attempt to parasitize it, or failing that I will leave so that you may rediscover what many before you already have. Here is some recommended reading if you are interested to learn of dozens of eye-opening examples of what happens when you hijack profit-making enterprises for charity upon a false claim to righteousness. https://www.amazon.com/Woke-Inc-Corporate-Americas-Justice/dp/1546090789
OIP-49A: Olympus Give Lighthouse Partnership with Gitcoin (Amendment)
Resounding "No."
How many times will it have to be said.
kbar I've been involved in Free Software and Open Software movements for more than 20 years now, both on the voluntary and on the corporate side, and can assure you that without corporates involved in public goods funding (which benefit them at first), we wouldn't be speaking right now at this forum about this technology. So instead of patronizing me that I will 'rediscover what many before me already have' simply do your own research, check how for-profit companies benefit from open source and public goods infrastructure instead of fighting some holy war without merits.
I will repeat again - in my opinion supporting Gitcoin (or any other public goods funding initiative) can be beneficiary to OlympusDAO, but we need to do our homework first.
I don’t think it’s prudent to open up DAO funds to charity and personal causes at this time. As others have said, DAO members and contributors are working hard and those funds should be used to compensate them and further their goals.
Additionally, Olympus is currently doing battle with dozens (if not more) of forks. Now is not the time to relax, begin navel gazing, and shift our focus to pet causes. OHM holders invested to make money and we owe it to all of them to remain focused on that endeavor.
DAO $ should not go to charities. Let people support support charities with their own funds. Sponsoring a hackathon that benefits Olympus is fine but spending money to save the planet is outside the scope. Completely. Vote Against!!!!!
KLIMA can ride the high horse of saving the environment by way of taxes and communism. There are reasons why some of us refused to join that party.
I'm with Steve on this one. Let's put a nail in the coffin of these morality plays once and for all.
- Edited
Its interesting reading the various takes on the matter and I guess my main take-away based on what I've read is that the OHM community isn't ready for this.
Here's what I think the problem with the proposal is:
Unclear Benefits to Olympus
I think the problem here is how the proposal is written. A lot of fluff with the right buzzwords but I can't really decipher what the benefits are. IF there really aren't any tangible benefits or if the real goal is to give to charity, then I think that's ok too. The proposal just has to be honest about it. I think you would have had a better responses if you just took away the section about "Benefits to Olympus" and instead focus on how Github impacted Olympus (with some facts and examples and not fluff).It's entering a space that is highly political
This is sad to me because in the crypto space I want to believe we can put aside political biases, but sadly this is not the case, and for some people "climate change" is a trigger word. If github is a community of developers, then focus on developers. Pushing the charity down one political path is only going to divide the community. Maybe one day we as a community will be ready, but this is not that day.Is it a charity or is it a partnership?
This is probably rehashing point one a bit but really…is this a charity or is this partnership of some sort? Clarity in proposals like this is key.
Some people simply dont' want the protocol to give to charity, and if that is their stance then I think there is nothing you can do about it. Don't sugar coat your proposal with intagible benefits and just try again in the future. Maybe the community will be ready then.
Kutu2 Our opposition has nothing to do with politics. Voting "No" does not mean that we are opposed to conservation. Take your "trigger word" comments and put them where the sun don't shine. The resources of the DAO are not a piggy bank to be raided in support of charitable causes. As DAO voters have a fiduciary responsibility to spend treasury funds only on initiatives that directly benefit the protocol.
- Edited
Alternative way to spread Olympus goodwill:
- Central team (DAO) can identify goodwill causes
- Arrange with artists to produce OHM+partner collab NFTs
- Announce in the Discord #charity-campaign channel :
- This week, DAO is asking ohmies to support with donations to Arch Linux / Gitcoin / Mozilla / FSF / whatever
(but one cause at a time)
- IF you support our campaign, please use address "0x …." to have your yield directed to this shared cause.
- The following NFT's, produced by artist X will be gifted to randomly selected winners among the donators.
- Donation campaign is effective from Dec 1, 12:00 UTC to Dec 7 11:59 UTC. - Reiterate with different campaigns on weekly/monthly basis
The NFTs should all share a common category, allowing them to be marketed and traded on NFT marketplaces such as OpenSea.
Benefits:
- everything will be on voluntary basis.
- All donations will be sent from pure hearts housing no ill will.
- Olympus DAO may steer/recommend/filter public causes.
- Olympus will stand in the limelight, and equally so will lucky individual NFT winners.
- A lucky NFT artist will get the attention of 50-100k ohmies, now interested in his/her/their art library.
- Collab'ed NFTs can proudly be displayed by winners at individuals personal galleries, and at an Olympus house
- Individual donators may even make a buck selling their NFT
- NFT royalties could further be directed towards the donation cause, triggered at each sale.
Because this would all be based on voluntary participation, the DAO may chose to call support for whatever cause. The NFT's should have some value and rarity - not POAPs.
shhpoodlet5-25-2 Have you even read the rest of my comment? I said there will be people who just don't want the protocol to give to charity, and there's nothing that we can do about that. I am arguing that the proposal was written badly and was trying to sugarcoat it. If all you saw was the "climate change" part then I think you've proven my point. And yes I did see some comments about people not happy with the money going to conservation, and that is entirely fair.
bubbidubb Another way would be for the charitable cause to setup a wallet that allows them to take donations directly and then they simply stake it for the rewards themselves. The team could take in the requests from the charities looking for donations > after vetting it, the team could add it to a discord sub with the wallet addresses and links to more information.
So I agree with you on your thought pattern. There is definitely better ways to let those who wish to make donations do so in a way that keeps us all focused on the mission without spending money out of the DAO.
I think we need to take greater responsibility and fund gitcoin is a start , which can help us build a more positive brand . Of course, from the point of view of AD, this is also a good opportunity for brand exposure .
smoothbrain Sherpas undervalued.. bigly… it may not seem like it if you're comparing them to customer support folks in call centers… but great CSR / advisors/ recruiters are very hard to come buy and those positions have high turnover…
as person who'se not a sherpa but held similar roles for a period of time in other projects on a tipped/ stipend basis… just because it appears folks volunteer to do this while they hang out in discord… to KEEP and retain those folks in a space where time represents a signficant opportunity cost vs seeking and acting upon alpha…
a better use of resources.
I very much beleive in tyche and what it can do.. haven't seen the construction but ohmies can self organize for individual proposals - self fund to the projects and iniatives they desire.. and I believe they will
While I love the passion for giving back, I still don't think this is within the scope of Olympus. I believe we have already been a massive support for climate change through assisting KLIMA. I'm not sure why we are trying to do another and I'm sure there would be another after this proposal. Let's just 3,3 and sit tight. Correct me if I'm missing something, because I don't understand how this would improve liquidity for OHM in the defi space.
I think it would be a great idea for discord channel to have Ohmies show how they are giving back this holiday season rather than the DAO supporting Gitcoin. Doesn't GTC have a coin with a $130m mcap?
I vote no on the proposal.
"We're a product of their efforts - without them, there would be no liquidity to own. We are builders and must support current and incoming builders as well as supporting efforts that impact the society we share."
This I totally agree with, and I can totally see the value in the concept of Olympus Give as a proposal.
At a structural level, there are too many different concepts rolled up in this proposal and its continued failure is an outcome of this. I would love to have seen a separate proposal around the concept of Olympus Give itself divested of any of the mechanics in the current proposal. The idea of creating what is fundamentally a foundation that the DAO funds and that then proposes Foundation funds to specific causes I would support, specifically because with each proposal I would be able to choose whether to move for or against Foundation funding - I don't like Gitcoin as a platform as I feel that it is both too easy to game and also too easy to create personal causes or crusades on (and also too easy to take already monetized causes and gain additional or unnecessary funding) - the utilisation of a strategic partnership mechanic under this proposal almost automatically made me a no.
The question of where the funding comes from for Olympus Give is an open one and should sit under a separate proposal post a vote for Olympus Give's inception - I would personally fund a foundation concept via rebases because I believe in the concept of giving back, however I would not support the concept of the DAO funding it separately because I do not believe that this is the DAO's core function.
Basically, conceptually creating a foundation like Olympus give, absolutely yes. Creating it in such a way that it can be in any way pointed at personal causes, no matter their validity, massive no. The DAO should never be put in a position where it can be pointed at anyone's personal causes, whether mine, Zeus' or whomever it might be - this proposal veers too close to that sun.
I'd love to see a way forward that delves further into how we conceptually make this work, I don't think we're going to do it with OIP-49A.
The goal of Olympus as I understand it is to become a reserve asset and the de-facto trading pair of the crypto market. While I can see there is good intent behind this proposal, I feel it does not directly propel Olympus forward into its goal and dilutes focus. So, as it stands, it's a no for me.
An acceptable alternative in my view would be to have a smart contract similar to "3,3 Together" where the users who are for these type of initiatives can deposit their sOHM and the rebases are donated to a cause or set of causes. But it has to be optional and up to the individual to give up those rebases. This alternative would also demand a financial investment from the DAO, but it would be finite.
As a side note, from a grand scheme, macro view, perspective, I do not feel it is a good idea to play around with our OHM reserve. While 0.06% is minimal, I just don't agree to touching those in principle alone, I think it would be setting a precedent, and I'd prefer it if that Pandora box stayed shut.
Sharing the concerns already mentioned in this thread. Currently not in favor of this proposal although I think Tyche itself seems great! I think another implementation would be more in line with Olympus personally. Even though it could be charity.
- Edited
Not in favor of this proposal, but very in favor of gitcoin and public goods and supporting those. I think that the Olympus treasury needs to remain pure in its single purpose of being a reserve currency. Reserves come in and are used to generate yield, but never leave to fund other projects.
Instead, I'd like to see support for these things come one level up - from OHMies themselves. The OlympusDao could help facilitate that, but not through treasury assets.
One possible way - create something similar to 3,3 together, but where every few days half of the pooled rebases go to one OHMie and the other half to something like gitcoin. OHMies in the pot could propose and vote on which projects those funds go to.
I can understand people not wanting to donate to charities, but to support new open-source projects and grow the ecosystem seems like a great plan. It could incentivise new projects to use OHM as well, increasing it's share of the market!