PoolTogether

Continued Funding of Coordinape

So far it seems that Coordinape has been a popular and successful program among community members. I have one month’s worth of funds left for the program. I want to gauge the communities interest in continuing the program. I would like to hear comments/suggestions on the program and any requested changes. There are a couple of things I’d like to bring up. First of all, I’d like to move the distribution to polygon POOL. This will allow users low gas fees to withdraw their pool from discord. Second I want everyone to be aware of the centralization of the funds for the program. In order to use collab land to distribute funds, they must be controlled by a single party. The risk is small as only a small amount of POOL is at stake. Currently, i control all funds for the program. as such I would like to keep this at another three-month period to lessen the risk. I would need to be funded every quarter until an on-chain solution exists. I believe that the coordnape team has plans for this so the centralized mechanism is temporary. If anyone has a better solution please say so. Third, I would like to increase the funding from 550 POOL/month to 1000 POOL/month. We have approximately 25 active coordinape users. this would increase the program to about 400$ per month per user. If you have a different number in mind please comment. We also need to decide where this funding would come from. If we pull from the treasury this time, that will require an onchain proposal to pass now and every three months to continue funding. If the grants committee can afford the expense i think that is the better option. I have constructed some polls below to guage the interests of the community.
Thanks,

Do you support continuing the coordinape program
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

  1. I would like to increase the budget to 1,000 POOL/month. we are currently distributing 550 POOL/month.
Do you support increasing budget to 1000 POOL/month
  • Yes
  • No
  • More than 1000 POOL/month

0 voters

  1. Where should the funding come from? if from the treasury, that would require an on-chain proposal and governance passing the proposal.
Where should funding come from
  • Treasury
  • Grants
  • Other

0 voters

Are you ok with the current centralized structure
  • Yes
  • No
  • i have an alternate suggestion (comment below)

0 voters

Collab Land now supports POOL on polygon.

Do you support moving distribution of polygon POOL
  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

Lastly, should RegisIsland be compensated separately for managing coordinape? Or should the bi-weekly coordnape payments be the method of compensation? If you support a separate compensation I was thinking around 600$

  • Separate Compensation
  • Coordinape payments as compensation

0 voters

Let me know what you think. Thank you,

1 Like

I’m not sure on increasing the budget right now to be honest. To me this would simply increase current members rewards. Is there a way we can encourage more participants in discord or through other channels?

Size of the team has increased since we started. If we want to attract new contributors we best reward the existing ones. 1000 POOL/month is not a ton when split between this number of people.

1 Like

I’m a huge fan of Coordinape and think the pilot program has been working well.

To put the amount into perspective: 1000 POOL is about what we spend on yield farming every 2.5 days. That doesn’t seem like an excessive amount to reward the community members with that drive Pooltogether forward, especially considering we don’t currently have very many paid employees of the DAO.

I like moving to Polygon POOL. Another option I really like is moving to UMA KPI Options. They would be a great fit for this. Unfortunately, tgey are not quite available yet and also gas may be an issue when redeeming small amounts.

Grants committee can take care of the payment, that’s no problem.

3 Likes

Im loving the coordinape process as i think its a pretty fair and democratic way to distribute value for time in our ecosystem.
That being said, im not convinced we need a higher allocation just yet?
I may be biased as ive historically done very well in the last few epochs and feel very well compensated. So ill stick my vote as ‘No’ for now on raising the allocation as a reflection of my own interpretation of the value im getting back for my time. If im outvoted by a majority that feel they are not well compensated yet, well then that is just a sign the system is working as intended :slight_smile:
As @Torgin states though, it isnt that much of an impact overall on treasury funds, especially when considered in relation to reward drips.

1 Like

I have voted Other for the funding source simply because I don’t have a preference.

As an alternative suggestion to the funding structure:

  1. We could have the Polygon Ops Team distribute the funds to an account @RegisIsland controls on a regular basis. @RegisIsland is part of that team so he can even queue up the transaction for others to sign.
  2. I imagine we could also work with a Sablier-stream.

Note that I don’t necessarily have an issue with continuing it like it currently is either, I’m just offering alternative solutions to what could be perceived as a problem or to possibly lengthen the period of the proposal.

Regarding the compensation, what timeframe are we talking about, $600 per …? I always gave some extra POOL to Regisisland because of his great Coordinape work, and that reason would be gone if a separate payment is in place, so I’m not sure which option I like the most.

Having polygon ops team distribute the funds would definitely be a good option. hadnt thought of that. I like it.

the 600$ would be for one quarter. I payout once every two weeks, so thats six total payouts per quarter, random bits of work here and there. I figure that’s an appropriate amount.

In my opinion Coordinape is one of the most powerful initiatives we have going. Thank you @RegisIsland for setting this up and overseeing it’s ongoing operations. I think a compensation of $600 per quarter is plenty fair. I like @drcpu idea to fund from Polygon operations or am fine with funding from grants as @torgin has expressed approval for. I do not think an increase in budget is absolutely necessary but agree the spend is a small ask for the return that Coordinape can bring.

@torgin, can you clarify which “yield farming” you are talking about? Our faucets are emitting 2400 POOL per day.

1 Like

For the record, I’m not proposing to fund it form the PolyOps multi-sig necessarily (even though we could). I’m just suggesting that, to mitigate any “trust” issues, we can transfer all rewards for a quarter (or more) to the multi-sig and every two weeks transfer the necessary amount to an account Regisisland controls for distribution. I have no preference where the funding is coming from (grants, treasury, polyops multi-sig, …).

3 Likes

Oh right, 2400 per day. I was calculating with 2400 per week.
In that case, 1000 is not even half a day of emissions.

I think staying with the current budget or increasing it would both be fine.

Update on the UMA options: They are expected to be ready in 1.5 weeks, and they will be on Polygon, so definitely by the time Coordinape needs to be renewed. What do you all think on using Polygon KPI options for Coordinape instead of POOL? Looks like a great fit to me.
(Small technicality: We’d need to get it supported on Collab.land).

The current setup for options we’re looking at is:
Success metric: Pooltogether TVL across all pools.
Expiry in 1 year.
0.9 POOL minimum value if TVL is zero.
Maximum value 1.4 POOL at 1B TVL.
In between min and max there is linear scaling.

This would put the value of an option at 0.96 POOL with the TVL at $120 million at the time of writing.

Find more info on what KPI options are here: [Proposal] Trial KPI options with the grants committee

Use POOL KPI options as payment in Coordinape?

  • Yes
  • No
  • The option parameters should be adjusted

0 voters

1 Like

I like your idea for KPI options! Seems a natural fit to align the incentives. As I posted in the discord I would like to consider it for a shorter time period. Like 6 months, 1.2 POOL, $500MM TVL. This ecosystem changes fast, and I see the options as a bit of an experiment.

2 Likes

Having the seen the yield farm emissions comparison I am convinced we can increase this budget. We can also try to grow the circle in the meantime too!

1 Like

I think we definitely need to increase Coordinape members. I think mentioning it at every Community Meeting so new members can hear about it. Also mentioning it on the Reddit is an option. Or we could actively reach out to people on Discord we see contributing a lot but who are not part of Coordinape

1 Like

If people could give more input on what they think about using KPI options, that would be great.
My view:
Pros:

  • Creates long-term alignment with the protocol.
  • If the protocol does well (TVL up), contributors get to take part in that success.

Cons:

  • Can’t be liquidated immediately to cover living expenses, which may be relevant to some.
  • V4 launch without incentives may have negative effects on TVL.
    I don’t think this is relevant 6+ months out.

To @underthesea’ comment: I like shorter options.

How about this:
6 months expiry
min. 0.85 POOL at 0 TVL
max. 1.5 POOL at $500 million TVL
That would put the value of an option at current TVL to 1.0086 POOL

I’m on the fence so I’ll defer to other’s votes on this. The lack of ability to liquidate hurts me as someone without much liquid capital to use towards making my content. Also, while sell pressure affects coin value, it does benefit Pool-ETH LPs right (more trades = more fees earned)? I guess it’s really a question of trading short term for long term gains and I can see both sides, so I voted “unsure” for now.

I like the general idea but personally I’m not 100% sure.
6 months is still kind a long, and that Options wouldn’t be able to for example Farm APY somewhere like Quickswap LP Pair with currently 55% APY. I think that should be considered into the Options value aswell.

Not being able to liquididate will probably be not so nice for some people too, although I’m personally fine with that.