• Proposal
  • OIP-49A: Olympus Give Lighthouse Partnership with Gitcoin (Amendment)

Summary: Leveraging Olympus Give to redirect yield toward funding open source, climate and longevity research in partnership with Gitcoin

Motivation: The DAO currently holds 955k OHM. The request is 0.06% (6bps) of the current DAO holdings to create a strategic partnership alongside Gitcoin to further the ecosystem of tooling and infrastructure of decentralized systems as well as improve the society we share. The previous proposal generated some good feedback for modification and clarification.  Some key points (benefits to Olympus):

  • This would not involve treasury assets

  • Ohmies will be able to utilize the infrastructure to do any yield redirection they’d like

  • Supporting Gitcoin in this fashion extends our marketing reach to new communities and enforces the narrative that we are the reserve currency in the ecosystem

  • DAO holdings for reference: https://etherscan.io/address/0x245cc372C84B3645Bf0Ffe6538620B04a217988B

  • This launch is designed to highlight the efficacy and power of Olympus Give by aligning ourselves with hallmark members of the crypto community

  • Olympus would join the ranks of Yearn, Uniswap, Synthetix and more DAOs who have helped further our industry

Original TYCHE Info

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 ```

The selection will be modified to reflect ONLY Tyche-based DAO OHM funds where the OHM is RECLAIMED at the end of the period (PLEASE NOTE THIS IS NOT TREASURY OHM OR TREASURY FUNDS). We propose yield direction of 1 year after which the OHM approved here is returned to the DAO total amount.

Modified vote below:

  • FOR: Support Gitcoin up to $500k in DAO OHM Tyche yield redirected funds (6bps of treasury OHM)

  • FOR: Support Gitcoin up to $250k in DAO OHM Tyche yield redirected funds (3bps of treasury OHM)

  • FOR: Support Gitcoin up to $100k in DAO OHM Tyche yield redirected funds (1bps of treasury OHM)

  • FOR: Support Gitcoin up to $1M in DAO OHM Tyche yield redirected funds (12bps of treasury OHM)

  • AGAINST: Do not support Gitcoin in this fashion (0bps)

  • OTHER: Suggestions below

The community will additionally have many options to redirect yield toward various causes including the current activity by bike4peace or other active efforts. The system as designed can point yield toward any wallet - we strongly believe that a deeper partnership with Gitcoin and the open-source community is mutually beneficial to all parties and the ecosystem. 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.

A community call is slated for Thursday to discuss both OIP-48 and OIP-49! As the next round is quickly approaching, we hope to find a useful direction within the coming days - the poll is scheduled to end Saturday Nov 27!

OIP-49 original discussion here - https://forum.olympusdao.finance/d/443-oip-49-olympus-give-lighthouse-partnership-with-gitcoin

Amendments to OIP-49 - yield redirection for 1 year

This poll has ended.

    I would like to echo a few of the responses to the last version of this proposal by saying I would be supportive of open source funding but not climate and longevity research. And I have a lot of KLIMA. It just seems out of scope.

    The revised proposal changes the amounts, but that's not what most of the debate was about IMO. I'd like to see some options for Ohmies to express their opinions on the proper recipients of the donation.

    My issue with the original proposal still stands. DAO funds, first and foremost, should be prioritized for internal resources and contributors. At what point did we reach consensus on DAO funds being a charity vehicle, regardless of recipient?

    The DAO funding a 3rd party (with principal or future yield) whose mission is to fund research into open source development seems like it's diverting potential resources away from existing contributors or potentially worthy internally developed proposals that are directly in line with OlympusDAO's mission statement.

    Last proposal I specifically stated I did not think people were acting in bad faith. It's hard to still hold that position now when you pull this kind of shit.

    The core objection with the last proposal was that DAO funds were being used for charity. It doesn't matter whether those funds come from the treasury, or from future yields, or from some other source, they are DAO controlled funds. It doesn't matter whether at the end the original sOHM is reclaimed and Gitcoin only keeps the future yield.

    And it certainly doesn't matter that you have chosen to refer to the exact same donation to Gitcoin, which you acknowledged was a charitable donation in your last post, as a 'strategic partnership' now.

    The last vote had an option for moving forward with amendments. Less than 10% of people voted for it. Meanwhile over 60% of people voted for 'do nothing'. Yet here you are less than 24 hours later, moving forward with amendments. This shows incredible disrespect for the DAO governance process, for Ohmies and their beliefs, and a willfull blindness to the core principles of the arguments opposing your initiatives.

    I am voting against, and further I will be drafting and proposing an OIP banning the use of any DAO controlled funds (treasury, future yields, or otherwise) from ever being used for charitable purposes in the future.

      ProofofSteveGM I would support your proposal, sir.

      Olympus is not a charity. This is that simple. There are plenty of better ways to build partnerships and otherwise spend that money internally.

      People being able to redirect some of their own yield is a fine idea. Leave DAO funds out of this.

      Eagerly awaiting Proof of Steve's proposal. It makes no sense to get diluted for charitable donations no matter the sum of money proposed.

      1-It sets bad precendence for the future imho as we strive to become a true reserve currency.

      2-It is my understanding that Tyche will be a fantastic implementation to offer an opt-in approach to what this proposal is asking for.

      3-Instead *donating. We have worthy members such as developers and sherpas who pour their heart and soul into the protocol. I think it's completely disheartening to see proposals such as this been forced down people's throats after we clearly voted against this in OIP-49. (as mentioned more eloquently above by PoS)

      ProofofSteveGM

      Strongly against this 49a proposal for reasons stated above. I will support your new proposal banning use of DAO funds in this way going forward. The last thing we want is a uniswap treasury piggybank scenario - total disaster.

      I don’t think that we should give funds to gitcoin when we have in house developers/contributors working their asses off every single day. DAO funds will not serve any purpose nor bring us closer to our goals by giving funds to Gitcoin. I would rather pay our contributors with those funds.

      On top of that, we have Tyche. A project that will allow the community to share some of their yield with charities and organizations such as Gitcoin. If the guys who came up with this proposal want to allocate funds to Gitcoin, they should open a Tyche pool and try to convince the community to share their yield, but again, imo DAO funds are not meant for this.

      Funding for public goods through Gitcoin is generally a better approach than specifying exactly where the funds would go as listed in the previous proposal. I'd be more than happy to deposit sOHM in TYCHE to fund public goods - it doesn't have to involve OHM from the DAO to achieve the same effect.

      I don't have much to add to the above, but I just wanted to voice my support for what Proof of Steve and Cartesius wrote. I will be voting against this proposal not because I'm against charity or the causes mentioned in the proposal, but because it sets the wrong precedent and because I think it's a slippery slope. And especially with the new Tyche project I really don't see the point in using treasury/DAO funds for this.

      Thank you for your enthusiasm and good intentions, but I am here because of Olympus' pursuit to establish a decentralized reserve currency.

      I am not here to support the creation of another centralized entity to enforce taxation upon other ohmies.

      No issue with Tyche, but Olympus Give smells like just another centralized power grab.

      As the last proposal was voted no as it stands right now, you should respect the opinion of the community, and not try to "push" it through as I think that is what many feels at this point.

      Don_G_Lover DAO funds shouldn't be used like this at all and this could quickly turn malicious

      To address some concerns above:

      Regarding compensation of the DAO and allocations toward contributors this OIP was recently posted: https://forum.olympusdao.finance/d/412-oip-47-olympus-stopgap-budget-proposal

      Moreover, the DAO continues to reorganize to better achieve goals. We cannot, however, stop collaborating with other protocols or investing toward the future of Olympus.

      Regarding the timing and amendment, given the Gitcoin round starting on December 1, this topic needs iteration to reach completion. I previously socialized a Google Doc with the original OIP with some feedback that was committed (see above outline of typical flows - click here for full size). Based on the forum post yesterday, I adjusted accordingly to better identify some items and closed that topic and opened this:

      1. Do we want to support Gitcoin in this fashion
      2. If we do support Gitcoin , by how much
      3. Better highlight the collaboration between Gitcoin team and Olympus

      I'm also once again restating this is leveraging Tyche as a highlight use case and the funds are not "spent." We want to highlight the power of Tyche by again using our own products (similar to how Olympus Pro was not rolled out until further in the life of Olympus).

      I appreciate everyone's enthusiasm regarding the topic.

      So after not getting your way in the other post you reapply? What happened to "do nothing" as we voted?

      Stop pressuring people to donate treasury funds. It ain't happening. Use your own money.

      I understand the objections here. Wanting to showcase Tyche sounds really fun and there's no reason it can't be done through an element of charitable giving. I would suggest using more of an endowment model where an address has Tyche pointed to a charity and users can direct sOHM to that address.

        pottedmeat If I understand this comment, I think having a model where ohmies opt in to giving to gitcoin could be a good idea, rather than having a DAO-level charity. Provide the gateways and mechanism for any ohmie to easily donate their own ohm if they want to rather than using the DAO-owned ohm.