[GIP-11] GoodDollar V3 - Protocol Enhancements

Governance Proposals
#4

Good suggestions. Thanks Hadar and team. I really appreciate finally getting rid of the unhealthy staking rewards and instead put the G$ to use for the community.

Can we add some language around how the new savings should be managed. I’m suggesting the DAO should be tasked to review the G$ Savings Pool parameters on a quarterly (?) basis. If they see that the savings pool is growing too large then they can take one of three decisions: to either reduce the 10% or increase the 5% or move some funds from the savings pool into the Community Fund. (And if the savings pool has gone below sustainable levels then conversely increase the 10%, or decrease the 5%)

Also, when now the DAO will be better funded - let’s be very clear about how people can propose and apply for various grants from the DAO and what the process will be to approve them. This doesn’t have to be detailed in this proposal, but we should give a reference to where people can go to learn more about it, to build confidence that these funds will be managed well.

5 Likes
#5

Nice proposal to try increase the capitalization of the GoodDao :slight_smile:

I have one question, When the G$ savings are live the GoodDao staking will be finished the multiplier (Increases 2x after 30 days)?

3 Likes
#6

I have the same concern, that is not clear, in fact it was never clear, could you explain a little more please, thank you.

DAO
DAO1003×243 23.3 KB

1 Like
#7

There will be no multipliers in the initial Savings contract. It has a fixed 5% APY.

3 Likes
#8

Screen Shot 2022-11-21 at 09.35.57
Screen Shot 2022-11-21 at 09.35.572182×618 117 KB

Happy to explain! The UBI staking contracts that we are discussing eliminating rewards (stake stablecoins, get G$+GOOD rewards) have a multiplier that was meant to encourage stakers to keep their stablecoins in the contract without “force locking” it.

Meaning, instead of having something that would lock people’s money for a month or more so that more yield/UBI would be generated through the 3rd party protocols (Aave, Compound), we have a mechanism that encourages people to keep their assets there by rewarding them with a multiplier for time staked. It gives the staker freedom to remove their tokens whenever they want, while also giving them incentives to keep it there.

Edit to add: The governance staking contract never had a multiplier as it has no need for a locking strategy.

3 Likes
#9

Why are you selecting nominates to rule the funds? That’s a centralized solution. You could enable a vault contract activated with GOOD tokens if you really want to try the power of community ruled funds (yes guys, that’s what a DAO means). What about conviction voting, for example?

1 Like
#10

Sure, we are all for exploring any practical solutions. The problem is that most solutions need to be built.
So as i’ve wrote in previous posts if you or anyone else from the community want to pick that up and help to build something or find community members that can, that would be awesome. It can probably also be modestly compensated from the future DAO budget .

1 Like
#11

Can’t you guys just fork 1hive.gardens solution?

I mean, that’s already built…

Also, I’m very curious about why it will be modestly compesated… Are your contributions to the protocol Also being modestly compensated, Hadar??

I’m starting to believe GoodDollar’s claim for inclusivity is kind of fake… Isn’t It?

1 Like
#12

Hey! Some comments from my side!

this is great! current configuration generates more inflation than the amount of interest generated.

what do you mean by “entitle rewards”? Are those G$s? A new token to withdraw liquidity from Reserve?

As a general observation, I think all these changes might be good! Still, I’m worried about all the incentives are funded out of inflation and see no proposal to accrue real value (including yields in DAI or any other currencies with sustained market value) and/or utility in the protocol.

I see that the sustaining an economy out of inflation might be sustainable if and only if the project has the trust and confidence from the industry and market, which I don´t think it’s the case of GoodDollar, at least not yet.

Why are you guys not including the multi-asset bonding curve in this? is that not ready? From my own economic perspective, that change should be a priority 1, specially in a time where the crypto-market is down and there is some much potential to grow (e.g. if we include ETH in the reserve, G$ price might increase proportionally to the ETH price).

What kind of indicators you guys have in mind for tracing the success (or not) of theses changes??

Last but not least, I agree with JAG comments, you guys should address the proper resources towards the real decentralization (and therefore market trust) on the GoodDAO. Placing a multi-sig there is placing more intermediaries (and therefore reducing trust) in the whole process.

1 Like
#13

entitled rewards - the rewards the stakers earned so far and haven’t claimed yet

the incentives as UBI are from inflation so it doesnt make any difference. and we dont have any other way to provide UBI.

We are open to ideas on how to fund UBI.
And we are always working towards getting G$ more utility. Hopefully things will bare fruit next year.

The multi asset reserve is in research and development, we just recently received a grant for it. It is planned for end of Q1

Regardless of the multi asset reserve, the DAO can decide to buy assets with the funds in the reserve.

I don’t think there are any viable indicators, we are mostly guesstimating, as always we are open for suggestion of anything the community think we should track.

Yes saying “decentralization” is nice, but it requires tools and processes, as i’ve replied we welcome the community to help.

1 Like
#14

I just can’t repeat anymore myself here… GoodDollar needs to teach the market on how the can play with speculation (as any other crypto) while helping others (with the G$ UBI scheme). I understand the legal limitations you guys have on selling explicitly G$s, what I can’t understand is How setting up a proper legal structure to do this was never prioritized.

I believed @goodanna was giving the proper priority to this after her replies on the transparency GIP, but I have seen nothing but ghosting from her after that. She committed to deliver transparency 1 month ago, and not a single reason have been communicated back since then.

I know, specially if you guys dismiss the only person in the people caring for that… For me it’s clear that the “decentralization” word is nice for you as well, it’s a shame that all that I’ve witnessed so far goes in the oposite direction… but this is just my humble opinion, ofc…

I would really hope GoodDollar Limited (or the Foundation if/when coming for real) would take care accountability of the proper needed decentralization and the project transition from just using the “decentralization” buzzword towards real commitment and accountability towards that cause.

1 Like
#15

Hi everybody! Good seeing the community engaging here :slight_smile:

Regarding the community fund, as the proposal mention, there will be a following proposal to assign guardians to a multisig. That’s the idea but it’s something that will have to decide as a community. Personally would love to debate and explore other options

If there’s no more relevant feedback in 24h we will move this proposal to voting.

2 Likes
#16

Hey Meri!

could you launch a signalling vote before that just to have a sense if the community is ok or not with such a Multi-Sig approach??

I mean, as @sirpy mentioned, it is a matter of effort (as everything else)… So I’m wondering why GoodDollar LLC is not willing to make such an effort and I’m really curious to see if you guys are actually able to tackle it in case the community is explicitly requesting such a feature for starting the GoodDollar path towards a real decentralized org.

1 Like
#17

quote-Seneca-Seneca-difficult-37
quote-Seneca-Seneca-difficult-371000×562 249 KB

2 Likes
#18

Hi Gus! :slight_smile:

Discourse gives you the ability to create a poll if you want to create one.

As I said in my previous comment, how the community is going to run the community fund is something that we can discuss in a following proposal once the reserve ability to send G$ to a fund is approved.

1 Like
#19

Why do you need to choose guardians to a multi-sig?

Isn’t there a Community DAO multi-sig already? Why not to use that??

1 Like
#20

I agree we can use the DAO multi-sig. There’s currently 3 members on that multi-sig that can initiate and sign transactions, maybe we can add 2 more from the community.

1 Like
#21

Hey there,

  1. We are all in agreement that adding funds to the Reserve is critical for the protocol to succeed. I think some of how to solve for this big hairy problem is known, in-process, and budgeted for (Balancer Multi-Asset Reserve), but there are still other parts of research and development that need to be scoped and researched. As you can tell, most of the V3 efforts are focused on stop-gap measures to reduce inflation. I believe V4 in 2023 will introduce changes more focused on encouraging Reserve deposits + creating a “fundraising pod” that creates an ask + financial rewards for community-led biz dev.

  2. Regarding transparency reporting, since your request on GIP 8 the core team has opened our bi-monthly community calls to the public. In these calls we have shared regular updates on the entity process, and opening a Foundation company based in Cayman. Seeing as the point of the GIP 8 was to increase trust / transparency, and the entity process has been dynamic, I have decided to not publish information that may shift / no longer be relevant / accurate - but we have shared regular updates. You can see the last call / public update here: Community Call, 17 November 2022 - YouTube

  3. The process for opening the Cayman Foundation entity is set to be completed by Feb 2023. After it is done, the team will publish a clear description of the Foundation company’s mandate (and how it relates to the GoodDollar Protocol / GoodDAO’s mandate), its officers, corporate governance structure, and operating best practices (interactions) with the DAO.

Hope this clears some stuff up!

3 Likes
#22

Hi community!

GoodDollar V3 voting has launched! Please, follow the link to vote Snapshot

4 Likes
#23

Thaks Anna for your clarification

sorry Anna, but I really don’t follow your logic here. The GIP-8 demanded a report, not community call-updates.

I remember also seeing your commitment to share transparency about GoodDollar LLC budget expenditures, are you also sharing that in community calls??

4 Likes
GIP-14: Activation of G$ UBI Distribution on Celo