[READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] dForce

[ScaleWeb3]

This proposal fits into Gov Fund Phase 1 and adds some value to Optimism: Voting Yes

Value-add: Good - Users adopting Optimism
Amount: Reasonable
Op distribution: Okayish
Co-incentives: Not well-defined

We see dForce as a long-term project in DeFi across crypto ecosystems. The proposal suggests liquidity mining, dev incentives and marketing which can help move users to Optimism.

Overall, the proposal is a bit broad and long-term stickiness of basic LM/marketing incentives is somewhat questionable but we’re giving the benefit of the doubt here and look forward to the concrete incentive design - hopefully incl. sticky, long-term, effective incentives (maybe incl. Uni v3?), leveraging the low-cost environment of Optimism as well as collaboration across the ecosystem.

[OPUser]

Voted: Yes

Pros:

1. Number of token asked is reasonable.
2. 50% token is going to marketing and builders which is aligned to Optimistic approach.
3. Token distribution time frame is good (6-24 months)

Sure. dForce community has demonstrated a strong interest and support to L2 expansion, with Optimism standing in the front rank. We believe we are able to match it 1:1 upon OP approval.

I am assuming here, you will be machining the incentives 1:1

Cons:

1. 50% for liquidity mining is too much.

Now, I am requesting your feedback on these of my ideas. Feedback is two-way approach, you help us and we help you.

Proposal to stop Phase 0 Projects to submit new proposal in Phase 1

There were 20+ projects in Phase 0, some of them has a good plan to distribute the token while other does not. Here is an excellent summary by @MinimalGravitas . Phase 0 officially concluded yesterday and soon OP will distribute 36M token between Phase 0 projects. Announcement With this proposal, I want to share my idea and seeking your feedback on whether to allow Phase 0 projects to submit another funding proposal in phase 1 or not . In my opinion, as long as previous funds are not exhauste…

Accountability of Phase 0/1 Funds given to projects

That is a good question, and this is what I was thinking. For integration fund, one example will be Infinity Wallet proposal where 80% is going for dev and integration - Let’s say project A is giving some incentive to project B for their integration, in this case I think it would not be a problem to share their address as both are public application. For marketing and content creation (for example 80% Marketing proposal of Kromatika Proposal): - This depends on content creator(s), if they are …

[Cryptoz]

I have voted YES. Mainly due to point 2 “marketing” and 3 “incentivizing developers” which can bring longer term value to Optimism. I am still struggling with point 1 “liquidity mining” as it generally just creates a short term boost with no long term effect as I have seen with hundreds of projects to-date.

[Mindao]

dForce is already running liquidity mining on OP without OP incentives

check here

[tipecrpto]

dForce use to be good before they got bad

[Bobbay_StableLab]

This has a good track record and the amount requested is not too much. Liquidity mining isn’t the ideal solution but it’s a useful tool. Point 2 and 3 will hopefully retain more users and developers since liquidity mining is only a short term boost. We are in favor of this.

[fewol]

Good proposal, not used dForce before but I have heard of it. The only thing I don’t like is the liquidity incentives as you wont retain liquidity once they dry up. Would be better switching the 50% for liquidity incentives with the 30% for developers.

[MinimalGravitas]

Looks like if you continue your growth at the current rate you’ll overtake AAVE in TVL on Optimism in the next week or so, very impressive. I’ve tried out your platform, not entirely sure why I’m able to borrow ETH at 0% interest but I assume there is a good reason. All seems to work fine so I’m happy to vote yes for this proposal.

I guess the most interesting part of the allocation will be seeing what projects build on your project for the 30% section of incentives. Always good to have more innovative money Lego to play with on Optimism.

[MGGYY]

Thanks for your support!

dForce Lending is a pool-based protocol where borrowing rates will be automatically adjusted based on market supply of the same asset (similar to that of Compound and Aave). Interest costs are calculated in every block and gradually grow over time until you pay back your loan. Read more through FAQ.

Hope this helps to clarify your query/confusion.

[mattbtc]

This is feasible，great proposal

[Joxes]

Hi @MGGYY, for us this is a reasonable proposal in terms of amount and use of funds, liquidity mining is standard and that’s fine. I’m OK with voting yes on this proposal.

[Exosphere]

Voted : Yes
Positive track record:
Tokens requested in range comparable to other projects:
Expected to grow Optimism ecosystem:

Glad to see a mixed use of the token allocation, between liquidity mining, developer incentives, and marketing campaigns. Good overall alignment with the gov fund phase 1 objectives.

[lefterisjp]

I will vote a reluctant YES here.

PROS

• Proven protocol
• Good track record
• Reasonable amount of tokens asked compared to their TVL (since we are talking about liquidity minin incentives).

CONS

• Too much spent on liquidity mining

[linda]

I voted yes on this proposal since it’s a reasonable request for tokens given existing metrics and traction.

[krzkaczor]

I’ll vote YES

Project quality: High - Stablecoins are one of the best products to build on top of blockchain
Team quality: High
Amount requested: Reasonable
OP distribution: So, so, Liquidity mining is generally not that great way to bootstrap long-term usage. IMO It would be better to spend more on marketing and less on LM.

[danelund.eth]

I am voting no on this proposal. Like GYSR, I respect what the dForce community is building. I believe that market forces are the best signal for DeFi builders. dForce has meaningful VC backing and those investors will want dForce to have broad representation across the L2s. dForce is incentivized to do all of the things it proposes to do without a public goods grant. dForce will want to drive TVL on Optimism with or without a grant. Stablecoins have proven to be speculative. While USX is deemed to be fully collateralized, it is an algorithmic stablecoin. I do not dispute the value of having a successful stablecoin, but I think public goods funding is better allocated to other projects.

[vonnie610]

Snapshot vote - passed

[bobby]

@MGGYY can you provide a Telegram handle or other contact method so the Optimism team can get in touch about paying out this grant

Feel free to comment on this thread, DM, or email bobby@optimism.io.

[lavande]

Hi @MGGYY! It’s been several months since your OP grant was distributed, checking in to see if you have a grant update you can share with the community?