Hi I’d like to make a proposal to give at least 2% of the winning pool each week to an effective charity that will be voted for by the users. I think it’d be good to give back and help people and we could make a difference in people’s life’s , especially if the pools start to increase over time. It’ll also create good will and a positive association to pooltogether but more so because it’s a good thing to do to give back and have gratitude for such an amazing platform . Just an idea and welcome to anyone’s input who wants to expand on this .
I really like this idea! Historically a portion of yield from no loss prize savings have always been redirected to public goods. I think this could be a great thing for the community to come together on!
This is a great idea and I think if implemented would help reinforce the good elements of Pool Together. Makes me wonder if we could some how have a “public perception” metric that gauges the publics opinion of the app. I could imagine that a lot of people question the legitimateness of it all.
Other questions that might come up. How do you distribute this money? If it was crypto, I think it would be straight forward. If it was a person, there would be potential tax incentives and since pool together is not a registered entity, I think this gets complicated.
Very good proposal @StrifeFair747 !
- Proposal should specify who receiving entities / foundations can be. Only those who accept crypto? There are for sure plenty serving good causes. If its also causes that only accept fiat, it makes the donation more complex and a route how to get the funds to the target needs to be worked out. For the first step, my recommendation would be to stay within the crypto economy
- Percentage to be discussed. 2% of the current weekly prize pools of around $100k adds up to $2k per week. Its great to support charity with such huge amounts but the balance between charity and savings/prizes needs be even. Further cuts to the weekly pools may come on top from e.g. Jackpots etc. So to me maybe going with 1% would also be a strong sign and contribution to society
- On Timing - would suggest that the charity pool accrues as long as gas fees are where they are. It would be a shame to donate $1k to a foundation and paying $25 for transaction fees. Although this proposal is a perfect fit to the spirit of PoolTogether, it perhaps needs to be patient a little
I personally think but it’s totally up to everyone to vote on but the charity needs to be blockchain orientated in some manner so there is complete transparency to where the funds are being used . There is a real concern with people when donating to charities that the people who the money is meant for never receive the appropriate proportion , which in my opinion should be almost 100%. I’m sure with all of us together we can find an effective manner and charity to distribute the funds for us, with complete transparency.
I’m not saying we do this right now but in the coming weeks and months as the community grows and things start to move . It’s important to give back and we have the opportunity to do so . This is an amazing platform and we’ve the chance to make a difference and show people the strength of our community and forward thinking to help others when we can on our own accord . This lotto is a no lose for us but let’s make it a guaranteed win every week for some poor off people somewhere in the world.
I started this to get a conversation going and I’m far from this goody too shoes type of person but if I see an opportunity to make a change and won’t cost us anything I think we should take it .
Totally open to any inputs and the 2% isn’t set in stone but 2% of every jackpot wouldn’t be much of a loss to the person who won it but I think we can l work together to come up with am effective strategy and solution . Who’s to say in a few years this won’t be as big or bigger than the powerball in america or the euro millions in europe . I understand the gas fee situation but all these things will get ironed out so positive thinking going forward will lead us to the correct path .
I would just like to say how grateful I am for pool together and those who created it . Thank you very much
In a few years euro jackpot will appear like a dwarf
No real need to vote. Create a pool where 2% is donated to a charity and then see what the participation is. Free market makes for a super easy fix. Simple. I have a feeling most people would be fine with that and yet those that aren’t would still be excited to use PoolTogether it’s original form.
In this new world there is simply no need to become the next “authority” on what is right and acceptable. Let’s trust the people because people are good.
I agree, the market will determine if the pool is viable. Although, maybe a new pool when gas isn’t a piece of the puzzle for some.
Whilst I love this idea in theory, in practice I don’t think there’s many charities out there which have a way to easily donate crypto (please correct me if I’m wrong!).
Perhaps instead, this 2% could be built up over time to fund attempts building an open-source, non-profit solution to make it easier for charities to accept crypto (especially ETH and ERC-20 tokens) instead?
i have not checked out each of the organizations on this list, but this could be a useful resource for selecting charities we wish to donate to. GitHub - porobov/charities-accepting-ether: List of charitable organizations that accept ethereum cryptocurrency
It’s actually a good idea !
I would like POOL to eventually do something with charity, not sure taking it from the prizepool is the way to go about it though. I think leaving it up to the user as an option in how they want to divide their allocation of interest is the best way to do it. For example, direct X% towards the no loss lottery and Y% towards this specific charity that is made easily available through the pooltogether platform.
I would have concerns if pooltogether POOLs don’t scale such that the the pot odds for whales to leave their funds in PoolTogether do not mathematically exceed the pot odds over leaving it in the Pool source; as the variance in interest return is a net negative for whales. At the end of the day if we want to attract massive pools of money we need to achieve this.
I am in favor of 2% to charity, it should be implemented at the same time as drawing revenue is built into the pools.
I think the first step here is simply enabling the protocol reserve. Previously the protocol reserve was set to 5% but right now it’s at 0%.
What the protocol reserve does is takes a percent of the prize and puts it BACK into the prize pool as “sponsorship”. Sponsorship are funds that are in a prize pool contributing interest to a prize but are NOT eligible to win. It’s a cool mechanism that basically makes sure the prize is always larger than just the money from the eligible deposits.
Once that’s turned on, all the prize pools will start collecting the reserve and at a later date governance can decide to dispense them however it wants.
So although I think figuring out an exact plan right now is probably a bit too early, I do think turning on the reserve just so it starts collecting does make sense.
Want to cross post this from the discord with relation to turning the reserve on and considerations: Once POOL distribution rewards ends and the reserve is turned on it might lead to a dramatic loss in liquidity is the tldr.
“The way I see it is, the POOL token is sort of a placeholder for something we need to eventually fill. I ultimately think whales will act rationally. IF we can provide a better deal for whales versus leaving their funds at source they will leave their funds in PoolTogether. For that to happen, PoolTogether needs to offer better pot odds to whales than the sources PoolTogether uses. If we take the current USDC pool, the prize is 90k this week. Taking 5% of that is roughly $4500, After one year the treasury will have raised 234,000 USD and going forward assuming a 10% average interest rate, will contribute $450 to the prizepool each week… but we are taking 10 times that and diluting the pot odds for whales to leave their funds at PoolTogether. So turning the reserve on is only something I think should be done while the POOL token is distributed.”
I’ll also add from a whale perspective, the two key points that mean that PoolTogether return > Source return:
1). Another layer of smart contract risk
2). volatility of interest return
I don’t like the idea. I don’t think it is realistic. In the long run it is better if there is a percentage that is returned back to token owners. Perhaps Chrarity gifts can be done once a year for Christmas.
Thesis Statement: Solve tokenomics 1st or you won’t have anything to give to charity.
I understand your point of view. However I dont think the lottery has ever been a means of charity. It’s something the poor participate in but it makes them poorer. The benefit of POOL Together already is that the poor never lose money. The problem is with gas fees right now it doesn’t make sense to participate unless you have a lot to participate. Eventually gas will be fixed. However adoption is key. If you want to help a charity give your money to charity. Poor and rich we’re both here to make money. If we provide a way for POOL to grow in utility it will increase the demand and the price which means it will equally distribute value appreciation amongst all POOL holders not just the “winner”. It’s literally the best way to spread wealth creation. I run a nonprofit that builds schools in refugee camps. Charity ideally should be sustainable and able to touch as many people as possible and this is done as we build a solid foundation for the token utility and value.
The sponsorship idea is very good…
If the big player quit then you still have. The accumulated funds generating prizes for the pool… i thin for the logivity and the self sustain prize reward this is something that should be proposed and be voted
what if depositors could signal a charity to point to from a list of whitelisted orgs managed by pool governance and if they win - the reward goes to that cause?
could start with gitcoin grants and the ability to split that % between different gitcoin grants, just a thought.