IrohC137

Temeculadawg

No I think you misunderstand what the proposal is saying. Using Wonderland as an example (though I highly doubt they are one of the ones we'd buy):

The distressed asset is wMEMO, but the treasury of wonderland is made up of say AVAX, MIM, & wMEMO LPs. it may be that a loss of confidence in the team causes wMEMO to trade below the value of the AVAX & MIM in the treasury. The way I understand the proposal Olympus would be buying the MIM & AVAX in the treasury, and offer gOHM in return, just distributed to wMEMO holders

I dont think the goal would be to end up with wMEMO in the treasury, which is the distressed asset. Just the AVAX and MIM which are unrelated to Wonderland's troubles

mysselium33

Yeah this makes perfect sense, just misunderstood the mechanism by which OHM takes the treasury assets. I am completely in agreement, if Olympus already has the treasury on hand we should be lenient with stragglers and there is little to no added downside therefore the change I proposed is unnecessary.

Thanks

SMARF

No I think you're correct, even as I wrote that I did feel the 'collapse' part of it wasn't crucial.

But it does seem clear to me that there is a time value to money. If OHM gets X return on assets it's clearly better for OHM to get paid today, and next month is better than next year.

Im not trying to punish stragglers, but from a purely financial perspective an option that expires in 3 months is different than one that expires in 12. And from a behavioral perspective we want to incentivize earlier swaps.

But i agree that this shouldn't be punitive or excessive

I like wanderingkevins idea that dev grants should be vested, but don't see a need to make community beat who cares if they sell we're buying discounted assets. The faster those that don't want to be part of the community get to leave the better.

Don't think we should put too much effort into controlling short term price fluctuations. Does it really help OHM if they all dump after 7 or 14 days?

Very interesting proposal, currently in favor.

One question about straggler period, isn't 365 days too long considering many of these projects may be months away from total collapse?

Specifically shouldn't we account for this through some form of decay as opposed to a static rate? Consider as well that money in the treasury today is worth more to OHM than the same amount in 11 months.

Perhaps something like 90% for 3 months, 85% for the next 3, and 80% for the remaining 6 months. I'm sure the galaxy brains here could come up with something more gradual if that is preferable, just showing an example.