The outcome of the last vote was that CNC emissions should be used for both LP incentives and bribes once the CNC/ETH gauge is live.
There will be two votes, which will run in parallel to decide on the details of how bribes should be distributed and how inflation should be split between both.
Vote 1: Platform for CNC bribe distribution
The first vote will be on which platform should be used to distribute CNC bribes and to whom. There are several candidates. I suggest to start the vote options with:
- Votium (veCRV)
- Votium (vlCVX)
- Votium (veCRV + vlCVX)
- Paladin (veCRV)
- Paladin (vlCVX)
- Paladin (veCRV + vlCVX)
Please feel free to suggest other platforms by commenting on this proposal and they can be added as options to the Snapshot vote. This will be single choice voting on Snapshot.
Vote 2: Ratio for CNC emissions
The second vote will determine the ratio between CNC emissions paid to CNC/ETH Curve pool LPs and paid as bribes. This will be a weighted vote on Snapshot.
As mentioned in a previous post, Paladin’s Quest can provide a very strong support to Conic’s goal of incentivizing liquidity while distributing CNC to the LPs:
- It’s the only platform where you can incentivize all wrappers in one incentive campaign (veCRV, vlCVX, sdCRV & yCRV);
- Fixed incentives is a better options considering Conic will do a dual token LM (CNC&CRV via bribes) because it means Conic will be able to target a specific APR on a weekly basis by simply redepositing unused CNC as direct incentives, which is highly advised in periods of high volatility like the one CNC is currently experiencing;
Paladin is good!
For a full view you should also know that you can bribe all of the above using votemarket.
Another point: you don’t have to manually rework unused CNC into a new bribe and you can adjust your max $/vote without active management. Can even programme incentives for the next 52 weeks.
Our solution is also fully audited by Chainsecurity and trusted by Curve Finance itself as well as handling over 300k of ~400k for each round incentives
Docs: Votemarket - Stake DAO
As mentionned by Hatashi, Votemarket could be great candidat for CNC bribes and a good alternative to have a look at. It’s on-chain, there is the possibility to blacklist addresses to avoid inefficient bribes, the Possibility to create multi-week programs, Fees (2%) are taken only on claimed amount
Hey, any reason you don’t consider Votemarket?
I think Votium for veCRV doesn’t make sense (btw it’s 0% market share on veCRV, for a good reason). I think today on veCRV, there are two real options: Votemarket and Quest. The fundamental difference is market price v/s fixed price. I think that should be the real discussion. Also question is on-chain v/s partially on-chain.
As support to the discussion, here is the Bribe Market Monitor for Curve:
I think what it showes is that depending on the bribe side, it can make sense to focus on veCRV or split between veCRV and vlCVX.
Among the options discussed, my view is there are no bad options.
Since we need to pick one, and as mentioned previously, my personal opinion is that it’s in Conic’s best interest to use the platform which has the most visibility: for Conic to squeeze the most out of those incentives, it needs to be sure that everything it spends is spent efficiently. Votium is clearly #1 in terms of mind share, and its ecosystem big enough that all gauges get an equal impact per $ spent thanks to people arbing everything to harmony. No effort.
My only argument here is that we should use the platform with the most visibility!
Hi everyone, Koga from Paladin here.
Really excited to see Conic joining the fray on Curve incentives, and I hope we can find the best setup for the Conic DAO & the LPs.
Concerning our Quest product, here are all the extra infos missing from Figue’s presentation:
Quests can be created for any desired number of weeks, allowing to create multi-weeks campaign and adapt parameters between each campaign
Quests parameters can be adjusted each week to match current market conditions, allowing to increase the $ reward/vote while making sure never to overpay.
Quest allow to blacklist any veCRV address to make your vote incentives as efficient as possible
Quest does indeed posses an off-chain component for reward distribution calculations, but this brings 2 advantages: the possibility to attract veCRV voters & vlCVX voters with the same Quest (no need to manage 2 different campaigns, or ignore the vlCVX voters) & the possibility for smaller holders to stack up their Quest rewards over multiple weeks without losing them, making those voters more sticky to your Quest
the whole Quest solution was fully audited by Spearbit, and been live for 9 months.
Another point that might have no be clear enough in our diagram is that the functionality allowing to reclaim Quest unused rewards will allow to increase the CNC emission ratio to LPs in case the votes fall short during a week (in case the vote incentives are too low compared to current market for example), allowing to make sure there is no week where the LP incentives are too low.
Votium is #1 on vlCVX bribes, and smallest on veCRV bribes (with 0 bribes for the past few months). There is a reason for that: it’s off-chain, and bribes are claimable with a 2-week delay, which users don’t like since market can move quite a bit in this time frame.
With Quest and Votemarket, bribes are claimable immediately after the vote takes effect. This lead both solution to dominate the market.
Imo, any vlCVX bribe can legitimately be deposited on Votium (and also on Quest where there is a nice solution as well, but not an expert myself). For veCRV bribes, Votium would be less competitive.
As a complement to what has been said, and to support decision making, here is the state of veCRV bribe market today:
Given the stimulating discussions that have been taking place on Discourse and Telegram, I would propose on having two votes this week and two votes the following week. The idea being that the community really decides on what is best for the near future of Conic and the distribution of CNC emissions.
Kicking off tomorrow:
Vote 1: Vote on who to give bribes to
- veCRV holders
- vlCVX holders
Vote 2: Vote on the split between CNC emissions for LPs and as bribes
Kicking off next week:
Vote 3: Vote on which platform(s) to use
- if both veCRV and vlCVX should be bribed, there will be one vote for each
- otherwise there will be just one vote
- the options for this vote can be discussed until then in the Conic Discourse (e.g. Votium, Paladin, Votemarket)
Vote 4: if Vote 1 turns out to select both then another vote is needed to determine the split between veCRV bribes and vlCVX bribes
Comment on Discord that was suggested to be mirrored here:
Conic is for all Curve users, it would be a shame to exclude half of them, whatever the half.
The decision will be slightly biased anyway because CNC was airdropped to vlCVX holders.
It’s a shame because there are tons of things that will be misaligned if veCRV voters are excluded. For example, yearn has been working strides with its veYFI and permisionless Curve pounders. There’s potential for deep integrations with omnipools and having their yCRV benefitting from bribes would create additional alignment.
Thank you to everyone who has expressed their opinions in this discussion thread. Tomorrow the final vote needed for determining how Conic will incentivize CNC liquidity will go live. Specifically, the vote will be to decide on which platform will be used to pay out CNC bribes to vlCVX holders. As influenced by the community members in this thread, the current options for this upcoming (single-choice) vote will be:
Before this upcoming vote goes live we’d, once again, like to request feedback from the community. The last time it was formally discussed was around two weeks ago and it is important that we consider any new thoughts or opinions before voting officially begins.