POOL Endgame

Governance
21

I’ve suggested bonds and options several times for pool distribution. Wish people took it seriously

1 Like
22

study PoolTogether + Olympus + Ondo

That experiment was run twice. I encourage you to use the search and dig through the previous topics on here. There is a good amount of learnings that was written down.

3 Likes
23

G9 still has a budget of $50k USD for security bounties. If a bounty is reported, then we are required to pay if the bounty is legit. That’s why the bounty is priced as such; we can afford to pay out two criticals before pausing the program.

G9 could request a budget from PT that increases the bounties, but you would have to keep a few things in mind:

  • This budget would become G9 revenue; we are a service company. They would not be returned, and may be repurposed if needed. We do not hold funds at the discretion of others. It’s an important legal distinction; as an example you can look at Defi Collective’s PTBR for a donation to their non-profit.
  • The PoolTogether treasury is limited; if we had to pay out large bounties the treasury would be rapidly depleted.

For these reasons, I think keeping the bounty program lean makes the most sense for the time being. PoolTogether should hold onto the funds until needed.

That being said, it’s possible to find external funding for security. G9 applied for and received a grant from Optimism to fund a Sherlock audit of the V5 codebase. This was approximately $150k in security funding, and the audit has revealed a few edge cases that should be patched up.

Budget can be found externally; and it’s a great action item for the community to keep eyes out for grants or other sources of funding that the protocol could utilize.

1 Like
24

That is simply dismissing any idea that I hope to share, because your previous experiments didn’t live up to the goal.

Please don’t tell me to study your failures and dismiss my idea before hearing them

25

Then please do the work and present the idea you hope to share in a dedicated thread. Your previous comment mentioned you suggested bonds several times, however it doesn’t seem you ever suggested it on this forum, nor engaged with any of the previous experiments to observe what could’ve gone wrong.

26

PTIP-90: Disable POOL Minting

The proposal to disable POOL minting is live onchain.

POOL holders on Ethereum can vote until 2024-06-23T19:19:00Z.

1 Like
27

Stop saying do the work, this is insulting. I can present the work i have done, but you have already dismissed it based on your experiments. It is complete and ready, but not going to be wasted.

I have tried to bring up the convo in multiple use cases in discord and it goes ignored or dismissed. I have the convo open, and it is actively being ignored in Governance.

Either the community doesn’t care or the entire community is Generation Software . Yes, Pooltime is the same as generation to me and likely others.

Saying that I am not doing the work is a lie because everything I share is nearly complete. It is a fact that governance has failed or is currently ailing, because the protocol that costs million dollar a year to maintain brings in zero funding for the dao.

See the difference?

28

I disagree with only this simply because l think it’s should be based upon multiple of senariors because the amount of Pool you HoLd shouldn’t matter simply like in my case and I’m sure others, I don’t hold but very little pool tokens soley due to I can’t afford to buy them
But I agree with the rest of your suggested items