I want to be clear: I think a fully deployed Curve would absolutely be good for both Optimism and Velodrome.
Velodrome’s success depends 100% on the success of the ecosystem, which is why we’re increasingly vocal in governance. I think it is clear now that some of the early proposals led to less than ideal outcomes and that is something we’re committed to doing our best to help avoid going forward.
Every new grant has an opportunity cost and dilutes those previously distributed, so we need to make sure the ROI is there as we continue to invest.
For me personally, subsidizing TVL and volume that will ship 50% of fees off chain may be a deal breaker given the existence of alternatives (not just Velodrome) that don’t require this kind of value extraction. Likewise for the requirement that projects will have to go to mainnet to engage in Curve governance to have a shot at having a gauge that might be eligible for the rewards.
If in the future these obstacles are removed, I’ll feel differently. I think the future is on L2 and Optimism users should be able to get the full Curve experience if we’re going to drop 1M in incentives on it.
That said, if these aren’t deal breakers for others here is something I think could make the proposal stronger.
Choose a single public good pool (like tri crypto) and vote to make it eligible for CRV emissions on Optimism. Then work with a collection of Curve stakeholders to commit to a certain amount of voting power that would be dedicated to this pool over the duration of the incentive program. Then request an equal proportion of OP incentives as a match or boost to those emissions.
This way, you are growing Curve on Optimism with OP incentives in a way that doesn’t gatekeep participation to those with mainnet presences. You are also functionally matching the incentives that Optimism governance is granting you, demonstrating a commitment to ecosystem investment.