Introduce smart contract to time-lock $OPIUM tokens which in return increases voting power on the Snapshot during the time-lock
Rationale
Long term commitments to DAO should be incentivized and one way to do so is to increase their (committers) voting power proportionally to their commitment (the time that tokens are being locked).
Research
Usage of Curve’s veCRV contract seems as the best way to implement the proposal, due to it being used in range of big DeFi projects and thus huge community around it.
What still needs to be discussed and finalized is the range of time between which locks are possible and the ratio of the multiplied voting power depending on the chosen time.
Here are the short list of 3 possibilities that were researched
Pros
* Locks that multiply voting power with linear decay
* Rewards system included (based on staked tokens)
* No active maintenance required
* Used in prod by BarnBridge and Universe XYZ
* Upgradable
Cons
* Useless delegation (Snapshot has its own)
* Locks don’t affect rewards
* Quite gas-expensive
* Users without locks also receive rewards
* Locks are compounded
Audit
* QuantStamp
* Haechi
Pros
* Multiplied rewards (may be calculated as voting power)
* Rewards are only paid to off-chain participants in voting
* Locks are mandatory
* Upgradable
* Locks are separate
Cons
* Requires active participation by other members (ejection of unlocked users)
* Requires active maintenance of off-chain participants
Audit
* Hacken
Pros
* Locks that multiply voting power with linear decay
* No active maintenance required
* Used in prod by Curve, Pickle, Frax and Cream
* Smart contract logic is simple
* Bigger community support
Cons
* Rewards system must be built on top of the system
* Locks are compounded
Audit
* Trail of Bits
* Quantstamp
It seems that Curve has a nice system? Also audited well.
The idea is perfect! According to the whitepaper it should be different actors who bring value to the protocol in different ways. The longer the commitment the more governance power contributors should revive!
I also think that in DeFi voting systems it should be clusters of voters that compete to each others and represent some core views/believes (like political parties). In such system people could much easier delegate their votes away to those parties. What about this @alirun?
I find some of the features of PieDao to be fairly interesting on paper - especially the separate timelocks-, however requiring a constant oversight from other users to eject expired timelocks would pose a significant UX bottleneck.
All in all, I’d be happy with Curve - plus, the fact that it was audited by Trail of Bits is a quality guarantee
@alirun you mentioned in previous two options in Pros section that they are “upgradable”
And I dont see this feature in curve smartcontract.
Please, can you elaborate a little about it, may be some example of issues we potentially can get into because of lack of capacity to “upgrade”…
Well, since veCRV works for a long time already without any issues I wouldn’t expect any on our side. But upgradability controlled by DAO could help with fixing potential issues/bugs in the smart contracts or allow to implement additional functionality any time
o yeah, first time I met this approach was in gmx.io project, where, actually they goes even further - all the rewards issued in esGMX token, which is actually just vested GMX … and you can then stake it to compound your yields or you can put it into un-vesting pool where it become pure GMX token by unvesting mechanism.
