• General

  • OIP Discussion: Wonderland Partnership & Add $TIME in Ohm Treasury

el_dan0 I think let bygones be bygones. Since then TIME figured out what they want to be ie. not the reserve currency of Defi..

There is no competition between Time and Olympus, different ideologies, different objectives, however most importantly both successful in their own right.

The two protocols can have a symbiotic relationship. In business you dont have to like or be best friends with your counterparty. As long as the outcome is a WIN-WIN scenario that's all that matters.

Both sides bring different tools to the table. The reserve currency of Defi surely will need to have MIM in its treasury sooner or later?

for exemple i would like to hold TIME in our treasury, but I dont think the reserve currency of Defi should be backed by Time, MIM would be great.

Hence to be able to achieve both the only solution is to have two treasuries: the Olympus Treasury that would hold Time and yield generating assets and the Reserve Currency treasury that would hold stables and whatever else we deem worthy of backing it.

Should the reserve currency of Defi be a rebasing token?

      Wonderland is centralized, controlled by two individuals. Wonderland requires trust as the two individuals are trading through their personal wallets. Wonderland holds assets that are publicly available and could be assessed and purchased individually without adding indirect exposure to new assets they might acquire. Even the way in which they hold these assets is identical to the way Olympus holds its assets. Wonderland has no clear long-term vision so how do we justify holding it as an asset?

        pottedmeat so what if the eventuality is it will become fully autonomously governed rather than by two individuals? if that's the only concern, then make that one of the terms of the agreement. perhaps one way is to bring one policymaker onboard to theirs and vice versa. we justify holding it by the other decentralized protocols that it brings exposure to i.e. abracadabra and popsicle, revenue generation in general, policy framework can be established to collaborate on the use of treasury funds from both sides together across both chains each one with a dominance in one particular chain (time on avax, ohm on eth), the benefits could be helping ohm onboard gohm on avax further rather than through the antiquated approach of pool2 rented liquidity, while time could gain exposure to eth's liquidity through ohm

        posting one of my replies from discord here for anyone reading on the forums:

        not at all, its more of a WAGMI mentality... looking at it strictly from a value bringing perspective, again i get the bad blood and backstabbery, however u have to consider it was perhaps just survivalship at play or just improper expectations or imbalance of mutual benefit, but now that both are grown big enough things sometimes can be worked out amicably for the greater good of both sides, esp if u are missing the greater point of defi and crypto, the real enemy or target are the bankers and legacy financial system, they want us to stay separated and their biggest fear would be two giants united against them, to take them down there's a real chance that it takes two of the titan DAOs to come together, it would show how powerful crypto and decentralized communities are and the first time ever two DAOs cooperated on this level, it seems like the problem simply stems from a lack of formal agreement from prior partnerships, if it were done right then there shouldnt be any issues and both stand to gain tremendously, even if it is done on a small scale to rebuild trust, a small holdings but a strongly outlined proposal of how to work together and prosper together could start things off. im looking at it from the perspective of what could be played against them, the elites of the global financial system, not us, crypto which is still in its infancy... it reminds me a bit of the btc vs eth debacle, when in reality 99% of us probably hold both and in the end the industry stands to benefit from both's success, what i love about this is that both ohm and wonderland were both completely grassroots, the spirit of decentralization at its best, no vcs involved or allocations from institutions stand to gain from this, just us normies and regular people on the other hand, i get people, relations and politics, and trust are extremely complicated so im not claiming to know any better, i just hope maybe something can be reconsidered or worked out with the people at the top because at the end of the day, both sides have made their mark in history in changing crypto and defi forever...

          Dom98000 i personally think time is the perfect asset to add to the ohm treasury, so as long as time has ohm in theirs, because it's basically a proxy to the rev generation and treasury of wonderland, which is exposed to decentralized protocols that are highly productive like mim and spell's protocol value (which includes UST running on LUNA), and furthermore, it gives instant exposure to the market liquidity of avax which is one of the top performing chains outside of eth, i wanna stress how it could create the feedback loop of value transfer and liquidity pool growth on both chains, with ohm's 400m+ in liquidity of weth and dai Protocol Owned Liquidity and time's 400m+ of avax and mim PoL, you can create a third LP of which is jointly owned PoL between OHM-TIME LP which generates even further fees…

              pottedmeat for the same reason it would benefit Time to own gOhm, income.

              Time is only serving its purpose in dani's ecosystem but why arent we aligning with MIM and abracadabra? probably because of the beef with Dani.

              I would very much like to borrow mim against my gOhm on Abra

                  Winnal Once again, Wonderland is still a copy/paste wrapper identical to a previous version of Olympus containing assets that could be individually assessed and acquired. Your proposal is a roundabout way of saying that Olympus should acquire the community of Wonderland but Olympus does not acquire assets for their community.

                      pottedmeat no, i very clearly stated it would be mutually owned on both sides, as per the proposal, time would again add ohm to their treasury the same as we add time to ohm's, that's the only way this makes sense and creates the flywheel / feedback loop by introducing ohm-time PoL LP and bonds for both wonderland and olympus

                      or maybe i wasn't clear on that. so to be clear, this proposal is for both ohm to add time and time to add ohm mutually together, and create a shared PoL of ohm-time

                        Dom98000 Olympus doesn't have a treasury for the primary goal of generating income. Olympus has a treasury for the primary goal of trust. Holding TIME does more to undermine trust in OHM as a currency than to build it.

                          a lot of ongoing discussion happening on discord, however, i would prefer it happened here, so instead im gunna post some of my replies for visibility:

                          pottedmeat:

                          You're right that it's not about money-making. I don't know what to tell you. A cornerstone of becoming a reserve currency is trust. And this conversation is, in general, about trust.

                          my reply:

                          and trust is also about incentives and alignment, trust that they wont rug themselves to rug us if we have time in our treasury they would have to rug themselves for us to be hurt, the fact of the matter is, they are building a successful treasury and ecosystem growth around very powerful protocols that is sufficiently decentralized (abracadabra and popsicle)

                          To those in favor of Time, how would you justify Time's premium? OHM could just purchase those assets in Time's treasury without exposure to all the extra risk assumptions and drama.

                          Market liquidity dominance of the PoL LPs on AVAX, treasury yields and outputs, flywheel effect of OHM-TIME shared PoL bonding, and a monopoly on the limited capacity caldrons of Abra and sSpell protocol rev which only Wonderland has direct exposure to by default without having to purchase it on the market. And the fact that you can't just outright purchase those assets on the market or wouldn't make sense to. It was sold to Wonderland's treasury through their bonding program just like Olympus' assets were through our bonding program. So through TIME we gain proxy exposure to their treasury growth and them ours mutually to create a feedback loop.

                            Winnal We would also purchase those assets through Bonding or OTC (if we chose to do so).

                            To make sure I understand. Premium is justified by:

                            • LP fees from their POL
                            • Yield from Treasury farming strategies
                            • Spell fees accrued through Spell owned?

                            If you run the numbers on those, does that actually justify the premium?

                                Questions that I think need answered regarding Time:

                                • What is their vision? What's their goal? That is very unclear to me.
                                • When will they decentralize?
                                • When will founders stop trading out of their personal wallets on behalf of Time?
                                • How would a partnership with Time move Olympus closer to its end goal?

                                I fear that any deal with Time would move Olympus further from decentralization and even closer toward regulatory pressure.

                                  This seems more about wonderland trying to remain relevant by chaining itself to ohm as we begin our next phase of growth. They can buy ohm as a treasury deposit if they like, but there really aren't any synergies here that benefit ohm. They're simply not 3,3 and we don't really need them to buy ohm either.

                                    JFry4 If you adjust it to the provable treasury growth against the inflation + the RFV, as long as it's sustainable, I would say a 2-3x premium is reasonable. Even OHM is tradable at a similar premium, so at parity, and with the feedback loop and mutual growth you could arguably increase that premium on both ends.

                                    And market timing wise, both OHM and TIME seem to be near market bottom, so it would be the ideal time to strike this partnership.

                                      el_dan0 No, it's about the potential feedback loop and additional value generation through a dual treasury DAO2DAO ecosystem and policy framework (that are on par with each other in terms of value and growth potential), in addition to the mutually owned PoL OHM-TIME LP bonds and revenue + liquidity ownership.

                                        Ruangwith

                                        Ok so it's a long story but short version is: The entire reason TIME came about was because their lead dev, Dani, pitched to Zeus and co that the fork would be backed by ohm to a significant degree. He made his fork, but didn't follow through on buying the ohm to use as treasury backing as agreed, only buying a little bit and only when it was dipping hard. He basically jerked everyone around until people lost faith he was going to follow through, then claimed he was being mistreated and used that as his reason for not following through. He then tried to liquidate ohmies by dumping all the ohm he had bought (he even made a tweet about it so there's evidence of this intent). Then, he took abra out of Olympus pro program for no reason other than spite.

                                        He then proceeded to use this same strategy to milk Trader Joe of it's goodwill and resources before betraying them as well, claiming mistreatment and dumping JOE. He claims to want collaboration, but his actions have been anything but 3,3 with literally everyone thats tried to work with them.

                                            JFry4 Cross-chain liquidity ownership of decentralized assets and a productive protocol ecosystem to create value and incentive to use OHM as a currency base pair, with inclusion of TIME, would further Olympus' goal of a decentralized reserve currency. TIME brings a proxy exposure to the most amount of liquidity without having to compete against grabbing that liquidity on AVAX which they have already established dominance over just like Olympus did on ETH. So connecting the two together would only exponentiate the growth and perpetuate the end goal.

                                            The other three questions would have to be answered and laid out by their core team perhaps through an AMA between Wonderland and Olympus. But if they can clearly answer those three questions, the most important question I have answered which is the potential being achieved, rather than the issues or concerns that hinders the potential from being achieved being the other questions.

                                              el_dan0 So perhaps now the basis of the partnership should be altered, instead of TIME being backed by OHM (which seems more like just a back-rubbing than real partnership and mutual benefit), Time AND Ohm are both mutually growing together creating a flywheel effect. That's what's different from the original partnership and this one, which given the circumstances, with Wonderland having established itself on its own it makes sense to reconsider the prospects and look through another view of the overarching benefits and goals which are in alignment of achieving greater value and reserve backing for both treasuries and DAOs.

                                              I feel like fundamental misalignment caused a lot of backlash and also accusations that can neither be proven nor disproven leaving everyone in turmoil. If a more clear strategic policy and proposal can be curated and adopted and makes more sense on mutual terms then I think there's far more to gain than there is to lose. At the worst case, both sides dump the other's token but it could be potentially avoided through a swap-back or something where we just get OHM from their treasury returned in return for their TIME. In terms of the OHM-TIME PoL bonds they would be discontinued and the assets can be withdrawn 50/50.

                                              Too many backroom deals and partnerships without a community voted and structured agreement caused this imo. This is exactly the testament of why a DAO must prove it's decentralization through the community-backed policymaking and clear incentives and alignment to achieve a shared goal.

                                                  Winnal It was literally his proposal to do it though, so I think this whole thing about misalignment is not reality. He wanted to get the fork done, so he said what he had to say to get it done. To be fair, had he said he wasn't going to do the backing and/or wanted ohm to use his fork as treasury as a condition, that would've been DOA. So I see why he did it, but it still makes him dishonest at worst, and at best, incompetent to see that the proposal wouldn't work. I'm leaning toward machiavellian practices, as the other evidence points to dishonesty rather than incompetence. Had he come to the ohm community to renegotiate a lower backing % or delaying it, the community may have been receptive. But he didn't, choosing to find a reason to reneg on the deal. The way they operate over there is not consistent with this community. I'll leave it there