Draft Proposal: Use Ranked Choice Voting for Duration and BNT Reward Rates of Liquidity Mining Campaigns

This in my opinion should be the general framework for LM

I think a really useful thing we can do is aggregate a bunch of the new pools that could be considered for LM and then vote on say the top one or two. This way we could streamline the LM incentives since we can choose which project should go up for a vote before we just randomly chuck projects up.

Could be phrased like this with a maximum amount of candidates and certain requirements like depth, apr, and amount of time pool has stayed full (if any) :

ex.
(Temperature Check) : Which Pools would you like to see voted on for Liquidity Mining Incentives ?

  1. LQTY
  2. RUNE
  3. FARM
  4. ANKR
  5. NOIA
  6. BOND

From here on, we can then take the top 2 pools and put them up to a votes where the options define the time and amount of BNT allotted for each :

ex.
Should Project X Receive LM Incentives ?
Against - No LM
For - 4 Weeks, 10K BNT / Week
For - 8 Weeks, 10K BNT / Week
For - 4 Weeks, 5K BNT / Week
For - 8 Weeks, 5K BNT / Week

Alternatively, we could have the standard LM set to 4 Weeks as was discussed previously and simply vote on the amount of BNT allotted for each campaign. This way the DAO does not commit itself for a long amount of time to unsuccessful LM campaigns.

ex.
Should Project X Receive LM Incentives ?
Against - No LM
For - 10K BNT / Week
For - 7.5K BNT / Week
For - 5K BNT / Week
For - 2.5K BNT / Week

This can allow us to be more flexible with LM, since rather than a flat 10K we can tailor LM to the needs of the DAO. A good example as I’ve mentioned before is FARM, which we really should want to be the #1 Pool for but does not necessarily warrant 10K BNT Weekly emmisions. A small campaign like 2.5K BNT Could probably grow the pool to be bigger than Uniswap, after the LM ends the native APRs should naturally be bigger since the buyback mechanism would be moved to bancor and we would therefore have essentially stolen a majority of the volume. Having more volume would make us more attractive to LPs and would mean we’d retain most of the liquidity gained.

Extension Votes can be a simple For/Against Votes with an added option to adjust the rewards should someone propose it.

3 Likes