Tweaking the Reward recipe

A simple request to decide if we should reallocate 5% of the rewards from the P2 (eth/pickle) pool to the other farms as a tweak to the existing pickle recipe.

I’m heavily in both P2 and PS (my new shorthand for pickle staking) and the time is right to potentially alter the recipe a bit to see how the market responds, but only through a measured adjustments to the formula vs. dumping in a cup of salt (i.e. large changes) that could potentially destroy the dish entirely.

Thus, we plan to monitor and revisit this recipe continuously until such time as the majority is satisfied with meal. Again, this is merely a first-pass attempt to see how the market responds.

Proposed adjustment below:

renBTCCRV: 5%
3poolCRV: 4%
pDAI: 4%

renBTCCRV: 7%
3poolCRV: 7%
pDAI: 4%

Rewards Tweaks
  • No change! Keep values as they are
  • Looks good! Let’s try it!
  • No vote: I just want to see the results

0 voters


Fully support this proposal.
We can encourage Harvest and yAxis etc to drive more TVL to us by keeping APYs attractive.
It’s also an experiment to see how much BTC interest we can attract in the current bull run.
I’ve heard it mentioned a lot that Harvest has a bunch of BTC earning 5%…how do we reach out to those users?

We shouldn’t touch the UNI pools until November 17 to capture maximum fees.
At that time, we can always redirect rewards back to LP based on the fate of UNI farming

Excited to see our first Discord poll if this moves ahead.


I know there has been changes suggested to pickle emission allocations in previous posts and I have always observed heavy resistance to any proposals to reduce % emissions to the P2 pool. I do not understand the market dynamics of the P2 pool enough to be able to grasp what impacts this proposal may have, but with my little understanding of how I grasp things to work, it seems like a formula change may help provide some new chemistry and also a positive outcome. I am looking for more input from @leekuanjew in explaining the impacts of this.


@yyctrader so the discord poll happens after a certain threshold is reached on the forum? I assumed it would be the other way around, i.e. poll created on discord after discussion and if required ‘FOR’ votes are given then post created on forum.

It’s still TBD but I think it makes sense to have a forum discussion first because we can’t really flesh out proposals in Discord. IMO, the Discord poll should be a condensed version of the proposal with just Y/N options and link to the forum.

It’s also better to have a record of the discussions, as things get lost in Discord.
Then, we append a screenshot of the Discord poll here, and move to snapshot if it’s favorable.

The idea behind adding a Discord poll is to get a better read on the community, since only a few members are active on the forum. It shouldn’t short-circuit the PIP-11 process imo.

Again, these are just my random thoughts. Someone can probably come up with a better solution.

1 Like

Yep, I see your point, it gets crowded in discord and important bits of information could get scattered everywhere. Your thoughts are pretty logical and seems like this will be the way to go! Looking forward to vote on our first discord proposal!

I’d recommend modifying the proposal somewhat.

I’d put this extra 5% and the 5% that was taken from PICKLE/ETH last time into some farming incentives fund and, say, for now, it will go as you proposed. Maybe not a literal fund, but on paper.

The idea is that we should find a way to stop the squeeze on P2. Until we see which way the wind blows on Smart Treasury or another mechanism to capture protocol rewards for farmers more effectively, we probably are reaching the limit of how much we can take from P2, and surely the desire to incentivize other pools will not stop this time, just like it didn’t stop last time. Opportunities will come, and yet we probably find it easier to rebalance from within the non–P2 farms, especially now that we have swap functionality between the jars.

As you say, measured adjustments. Still, death by a thousand cuts is just as deadly. If you’ve timed your entry into P2 well, you’re probably fine now, especially thanks to ETH, but otherwise, the incentives are sort of starting to get into the territory where, as a farmer, you are starting to ask yourself the hard questions. The monetarist price logic hasn’t really panned out. I am on the farmist or yieldist side of the argument there.

I am not totally opposed to increasing the share. I am also in renBTC pool since it started so I arguably stand to benefit. Yet, I know, the PICKLE accumulation palooza is on P2, as it should be. That’s why I suggest should we go ahead, let’s consider doing it with that caveat.


I’ll try and shoe a forward-looking idea in, for when UNI inevitably runs out.
We won’t be able to sustain any of the UNI pools, and the remaining three (at least in my model) could share the remaining profits, at least until something awesome this way comes.

Please check here.

1 Like