Proposal to migrate the remaining rewards from the v1 sUSD farm to the v2 psCRV farm.
For those of you who aren’t familiar with the history:
About one week ago, our dev team launched the first pickle jar. This jar was called Jar 0. It was our first jar and it was fairly simple as compared to the ones we were considering for future development.
This jar’s strategy was very similar to the ones that are popular on yearn.finance except that it farms the sCRV pool instead of the y pool.
We proposed several different funding mechanisms for this pool, but ultimately decided to allocate 75% of the rewards from the gen 1 sUSD pool. This resulted in a total of 3% of all pickle emissions going to jar 0, and 1% going to sUSD.
In the days since, we have discontinued all gen 1 pools and migrated towards a jar > farm strategy. I think it’s time to migrate the remaining portion of the original sUSD farm to the new psCRV farm.
If this is already in action, I apologize. Can we get this to a community vote ASAP? Pickle emissions are set to halve soon and I’d love to see this take effect soon.
I’d support this, it makes sense to me. We can make this a PIP!
Are you guys on this? Should we submit to the PIP forum for a community vote or go straight to snapshot?
Rebalancing rewards between pools is likely to be quite frequent, and is likely to become more contentious as more liquidity is added. There should probably be a formal procedure for announcing / voting / implementing such changes.
I’d give it more than 20 minutes to see if there are any objections, but seems like a given to me.
Maybe if all positive reactions within 4hrs, it moves to a Discourse PIP and then 12hrs after that to Snapshot? See discussion around governance
Agree. I still think a formalized governance process is the most important thing because it makes all these conversations go more smoothly.
- Governance chat features conversations that lead to a fleshed out proposal
- Full proposal lands on PIP chat. Users can vote yes, no, or more discussion needed
- As long as enough folks are in yes camp, we move to snapshot?
Is this too long of a process? I just think we need to create a constitution that makes all this obvious AND allows us to quickly build and evolve.
PS: This topic is being discussed in a different thread. Perhaps we should try and keep the conversations regarding overall governance process in one place.
Thats indeed a good idea - lets look at UNI where you cant even make a proposal unless you secure some specific amount of positive feedback.
Doesn’t UNI require 10,000,000 UNI held or delegated to you to make a proposal? Maybe that’s to create an official one. Definitely don’t want to go that route.
We (the core devs) support this proposal, feel free to make a PIP @jjdubs and we can endorse it on the announcements channel.