[READY] [GF: Phase 1 Proposal] GYSR

Project Name: GYSR

Author Name: Alex Koren

Number of OP tokens requested: 400,000

L2 Recipient Address:

Relevant Usage Metrics: (TVL, transactions, volume, unique addresses, etc.)
Transaction Volume: $1.5B
TVL: $7M
Pools: 427
Unique addresses: 5,000+

Optimism alignment (up to 200 word explanation):
GYSR is a platform for on-chain incentives that’s compatible with any ERC-20 or ERC-721 tokens. As the Optimism chain is growing, we believe it’s extremely valuable to have open source platforms and no-code solutions for fair token distribution, liquidity incentives, and governance rewards.

Proposal for token distribution (under 1000 words):
GYSR’s goal is to help make Optimism an easy choice for developers and communities to deploy new projects or expand their current ecosystem beyond Mainnet. In addition, we need to ensure that the communities surrounding these projects have the correct incentives and confidence to move to Optimism to take advantage of the infrastructure. We’d like to use the allocation in four ways:

  1. Provide bonus incentives on top of deployed GYSR Pools
  2. Kickstart migration of GYSR over from our other supported networks to Optimism
  3. Cover minor development costs for client-side integration
  4. Offer small grants to projects deciding between our other supported networks and Optimism

How will the OP tokens be distributed?

  1. 35% to set up incentives for 3rd party Pools deployed on GYSR (on Optimism) for distribution over a year
  2. 35% to set up incentives for GYSR token migration to Optimism over a year
  3. 25% to cover development and maintenance cost of Optimism-specific GYSR tech
  4. 5% as incentives for projects to use Optimism over other networks as part of their deployment

How will this distribution incentivize usage and liquidity on Optimism?
GYSR is designed to make liquidity mining and other on-chain incentives extremely easy to set up. By offering side-by-side rewards and incentives specifically on Optimism it will make it encourage users to move their assets to Optimism for better return rates. Since GYSR acts as an add-on for many projects, this means that people coming to GYSR are not only leveraging the GYSR platform - They’re interacting with DEXs, liquidity protocols, and more. That means users having breadth of usage on Optimism, not just on a single dapp.

Why will the incentivized users and liquidity remain after incentives dry up?
The incentives we’ve described are only augmentation to the GYSR Pools that are created. Come for the OP and incentives, stay for the projects that you engage with along the way. GYSR is a hub for many projects to provide their distributions and users who come to GYSR use it as a source of discovery. Landing on the platform means connecting with projects you know and finding new ones to engage with as they launch which is not dependent on the OP being provided temporarily.

Over what period of time will the tokens be distributed?
We’ve planned for 1 year as we believe it’s a long enough time horizon to keep users engaged, but short enough to offer meaningful returns.

How much will your project match in co-incentives?
GYSR will be offering up 100K GYSR tokens in incentives for distribution through the GYSR platform on Optimism.


The amount of OP you’re asking for is a large percentage of your circulating market cap. Even if we generously assume Optimism gains your entire $7M TVL, paying 400k OP to do that is very expensive. I see little reason to think that TVL would stick around after the OP dries up. Your match is microscopic compared to the OP you’re requesting.

I think the amount of OP needs to be dramatically lowered for this to be remotely considered.

Sounds like an interesting proposal. Interested to learn more.

could you please provide team information, do you have a website ?

also TVL to amount of toke asked is quite low, are you willing to lower it, and submit another proposal later on with more data and statistics ?

I have had a look at your website and it looks like you have very little TVL on Optimism with only $2,950.90. How would using OP incentives actually ensure long term usage as it looks like at the moment you have very limited usage and any incentives would only result in short term usage until they dry up.

Source: https://app.gysr.io


Thanks for having a look and we can totally recognize the disparity here. $7M TVL is an unusually low amount for the GYSR platform given the current market conditions. We’ve handled TVLs of over $100M over the course of the two years we’ve been live and tend to fluctuate along with the market. Since we’re often used as a liquidity incentive for new projects and launches are down, it’s reasonable that our TVL (and our token price) represents that as well.

That being said, GYSR remains a battle hardened platform that has provided tooling for hundreds of projects with a proven track record of robust contracts and continued development. We hope that these tangibles and intangibles showcase why an investment in GYSR from the grant would be worthwhile to help build our presence on Optimism.


Hey OPUser, please have a look at our latest response to @solarcurve for some more context!

But in addition, you can check out more here:

and here:


I would like to point our that this proposal isn’t only about migrating liquidity over from Mainnet. GYSR is a platform that supports projects and developers in their early days with a variety of liquidity mining and onchain incentive based products. Having GYSR on Optimism benefits the ecosystem as a whole by providing tools to other projects getting their start on Optimism.

A very large ask given TVL + unsure of the value here to OP?

You should have tried 40,000 :wink: , some self reflection goes a long way <3

1 Like

Hey @tongnk! GYSR is first and foremost a tool for builders. We talk a lot about benefits here in the docs, and I think the most important is time savings and focus. By providing an out-of-the-box/zero-code solution for incentives, we can help projects on Optimism build faster and more safely.

As a non-developer myself, I’m unable to gauge the value your project will bring to Optimism relative to the (as others have pointed out, large) amount requested, so I’ll choose to Abstain.

This proposal fits into Gov Fund Phase 1 but the value-add to Optimism is small: Voting No *

Value-add: LM out of the box - but few projects & small community so far
Amount: A big high
Op distribution: Good
Co-incentives: Small compared to Ask

We saw Gysr as an interesting middleware tool to kickstart projects liquidity and create sticky, long-term incentives. Adoption of Gysr has been small though for a variety of reasons which reflects in the current market cap and consequently also in the value-add (vs. the Ask) to the Optimism ecosystem.

Sidenote: We have been early users of Gysr, liked the gamified incentives for long-term sticky liquidity but saw crippling effects of l1 transaction costs. Hence, we see value in your push to Optimism. We generally like the proposal, would be happy to see Gysr on Optimism. We’d recommend collaborating with launchpads, other projects enganging in liquidity mining on Optimism (See Phase 0/1 Proposals such as the dForce Proposal) and potentially do another proposal with a smaller ask in one of the next phases.

*voted initially Abstain, and changed it to No to align this vote with our decisions on other proposals.

Voted : No

Token asked is little high low compared to how the team is planning to distribute it. 30% to token migration is too much without a plan on how they are going to do this, I can bridge the token to OP and bridge back again…and repeat the same steps to farm the incentives.

Suggestion: Break it into two proposals

On feedback topic, would love your opinion here.

Hello @gysr, I have been thinking deeply about the proposal & use of the protocol, and what kind of projects will benefit next, it looks risky and very susceptible to gaming the incentive system. What do you think about lowering the amount and (assuming a better reception) see the results for future continuation of your plan. As it stands, my vote is no.

1 Like

There is far too little adoption on Optimism and not much value added to Optimism either. The amount requested compared to the TVL on optimism does not correlate. For now, we will be voting no.

Thank you for sharing your proposal. I don’t believe the current metrics, particularly TVL, are at a point yet where it makes sense for Optimism to provide that level of funds.

1 Like