bouttreetreefiddy

  • Aug 24, 2022
  • Joined Jul 19, 2021
  • Shpadoinkal could be used to partially repay the pool 18 victims. Or I guess to patch up the $10mil loss by Olympus itself. Tribe made a mess.

    Disclaimer: I have stuck collateral in pool 18

    • I'd like to propose that instead of burning the OHM removed from liquidity via OIP-94, we segregate it and use it to incentivize Olympus Pro Partners and Bonders to bond OHM-X LPs. This would be a two-tiered incentive structure:

      1. OlyPro Partner fees reduced for OHM-X LP bonds, and
      2. Bonders of OHM-X LPs receive a claim on the segregated OHM {via some method}

      This is a prime opportunity to experiment with incentivized utilization of OHM as a unit of exchange. Isolating these tokens (unstaked) instead of burning will remove the OHM from circulation until distributed.

      Direct savings offered to Partners working to build LPs will be indirectly (likely partially) offset by Treasury LP fees accrued by bonders purchasing the OHM to bond said pairs, though I'd argue that reduced partner fees are an almost valueless loss due to their high-risk, as is the value of treasury-based governance.

      The OHM pulled from liquidity is to be rewarded to bonders via some means, e.g. :

      • Payout OHM from OlyPro bonds from a contract wallet instead of via mint. Possible? If not,
      • This OHM be provided to the bonder at a small discount to form the liquidity pair (again, possible?). An advantage here is the OHM then sits in an LP and cannot be staked until purchased, delaying dilution.
      • Or, choice three: some amount of this OHM (3.3% of the value of the OHM in the LP bond?) be rewarded to the Bonders in addition to their claim at maturity. This seems least beneficial to Olympus, while being easy to market.
      • Other ideas welcome! This is essentially dead OHM we're discussing, so please get creative.

      Meanwhile, until {distributed via some means} and staked, no dilution will result from the OHM in this stash and we will not be burning supply - I have some concern over a potential situation in which the amount of OHM burned needlessly delaying long-term expansion goals. This avoids the burn completely.

      While OIPs-93/4 will help to stabilize OHM and hopefully build trust with the wider community, we need to continue searching for methods for systemic diffusion of OHM. Odyssey is a one such move. Olympus Pro, as I originally understood it, was meant to perform similarly. Unfortunately, most OlyPro partners have chosen to bond non-OHM LPs (there are zero OHM pair bonds currently). I see this as another sign of the lack of trust in OHM. OlyPro partners need some additional incentive. So, let's use this to-be-burned OHM to get ETH and DAI out of swaps between OHM and Olympus Pro Partner tokens.

      With proper incentive we can convince OlyPro Partners and their Bonders to use OHM as a means of exchange. As the token would be burned otherwise, I see very little downside to providing such an incentive. We're gonna keep the money printer brrring for years anyway. It's mostly a matter of numbers, where I honestly have no clue:

      • If this would require a serious rework immediately, or if it's simply a matter of sending OHM to an OlyPro multisig instead of 0x0000.
      • What level of incentives could, or should, be offered.
      • How much OHM is expected to be removed from liquidity via OIP-94, and whether it is expected to be a one-shot process or if it ebbs and flows.

      Looking forward to y'alls thoughts.

    • Additional Proposal: I'd like to propose that instead of burning the OHM, we segregate it and use it to incentivize Olympus Pro clients to bond OHM-X LPs.

      This is a prime opportunity to experiment with incentivized utilization of OHM as a unit of exchange - isolating these tokens instead of burning will remove the OHM from circulation until utilized in an OlyPro LP Bond. It should not be staked. As such, until eventually purchased from the respective LP and staked, no dilution will result from the OHM in this stash. This would also prevent a situation in which the amount of OHM burned becomes detrimental to long-term expansion goals.

      While OIP's-93/4 will help to stabilize OHM and hopefully reignite interest from the wider community, we need to find other methods of diffusing OHM throughout the system. Odyssey is a great move. As are many others. Let's use this to-be-burned OHM to get ETH and DAI out of swaps between OHM and Olympus Pro partner tokens.

      I saw a little interest in Discord, but if folks are for it here I can write up a post in General.

      • json Ah fair, so less emissions and less dilution as the LP OHM is initially unstaked (until purchased and staked). Am I getting that right? The math sounds tricky there so maybe I'm way oversimplifying.

        Aside from the perception part of things ("its not sustainable they chopped apy in half to make it work ponzeus rabblerabble!!"), I can dig. Just gotta make sure the messaging communicates that clearly.

      • Re: reward rate change. I am thinking it would be more beneficial to maintain the current APY (increase reward rate) for two reasons:

        1. perception- yes Olympus will be defending with the treasury but the decrease in APY at the same time may create the appearance of unsustainability.

        2. We need to keep increasing supply. There's only like 17million OHM. Reducing emissions again so early seems counterproductive over the long-term.

        I feel the safest choice is implement with increased reward rate. If we find that this rate of emissions is impeding the progress of OIP-93, a reward rate reduction OIP can be proposed to adjust.

        • Pulleys and levers, fosho. I’m sure some balancing math needs to be done but it’s good point/idea

        • I'm in disagreement with the overall framework for a few reasons.

          1. Last time this discussion popped up it was rushed and there was a mini-exodus. That's bad for OHM. The high APY is the main draw to the protocol. We don't have much else to offer right now aside from cOHMmunity and incOHMMMMMe. The protocol needs to offer more before we kill our star attraction. TLDR: Bad PR.

          2. Last time the overall market was in re-accumulation, while OHM had already tanked 80%. We are currently (arguably) back in a crypto bull-market. Lowering APY now could cause a larger exodus as folks seek larger gains - OHMies still gotta feed their familia. TLDR: Bad timing.

          3. Now for useful input - I first and foremost agree with a reduction in APY -slowly- like a Sarlac. However, I think it's worth more deeply discussing other ways to manage supply, for the reasons stated above, such as finding use cases for burning OHM, or permanently locking it up, like in the LPs. Maybe we could incentivize permanent staking of OHM somehow. TLDR: Burn it to the ground. Or something.

          I know this is a lot of "do this kind of thing somehow," but my main point is : What draws folks to OHM right now is high APY and flexible staking. To gut the main draw of the protocol at a time when folks might already be attracted elsewhere is risky. I propose we hold off from any further reduction in APY in the near-term (e.g. until EOY) and thoroughly discuss other ways to permanently remove OHM from circulation.