Community Mining (LM phase 2)

Community Mining (LM phase 2)

The LM phase 2 will run for 591300 blocks (~3 months), starting at block number 12895835 (one block after LM phase 1 ended) and will end at block number 13487135.

1. Incentivising New Users

New B.Protocol users includes any users who join during LM phase 2 (as described above) through any of these integrations:

  • Current Maker and Compound integrations.
  • New Liquity<>B.Protocol integration (from any UI, including Pickle and other UIs that might be added).
  • Instadapp<>B.Protocol and/or other integrations that might be added during this LM phase.

It is proposed that a one-time reward of 50 BPRO will be given to new users who Import their accounts or open new ones on B.Protocol.

In order to prevent sybil attacks, eligible accounts for this reward must have a minimum of $10k worth of assets in deposits, for a minimum period of 30 days. The reward is limited to the first 300 unique addresses. ​​All rewards will be distributed 30 days after the end of the 90-days period to enable also last minute users to get the rewards they are entitled to.

2. KPI-based Liquidity Mining for users

It is proposed that UMA’s KPI Options will be used for the KPI based LM.

For that, 90k BPRO from the DAO Reservoir account will be deposited as collateral to mint 90k BPRO UMA Option tokens (ERC20), that will be distributed to Users according to the same conditions as the previous LM. A floor price of 33% will be set and the options will mature at the end of the 2nd LM phase, at block number 13487135. If the TVL of B.Protocol will reach or exceeds $150m, the options will mature to 100% (1 BPRO per option). If the TVL fails to reach $150m the option will mature at the floor price (0.33 BPRO per option), and the remaining 60k BPRO will be returned to the DAO Reservoir account.

3. Providing One-Sided BPRO Liquidity on Uniswap v3

Having liquidity of BPRO for new members who would like to join and participate in the governance of B.Protocol is important for the health of the protocol. Still, it seems the LPs rewards in the first LM didn’t achieve the goal of growing the number of participants.

It is suggested that the B.Protocol DAO will deposit 100k BPRO tokens from its reservoir into a Uniswap V3 BPRO/ETH pool, as a new mechanism to provide liquidity for new small to medium members. The 100k BPROs will be concentrated between the range of $2-$5, according to the current ETH value at the day of the execution. .

This way the DAO can guarantee liquidity for new members who wish to join the governance.

4. Growth Squad Fund

Putting direct efforts in the growth, promotion and marketing of the protocol was raised by a few members on the forum and Discord. It was proposed that a new community based “Growth Squad” will be formed to pursue this goal.

This proposal suggests, in accordance with previous discussions, that a Growth Squad Fund will be funded by the DAO with 25k BPRO to be utilized towards certain growth KPIsas were suggested in this thread link.

5. Backing B.Protocol-Immunefi Bug Bounty Program

Many users in DeFi consider the security of the protocols they are using as the leading measurement for their involvement. Last week, Immunefi launched a new Bounty Program for B.Protocol, with up to 50k BPRO bounties.

This proposal suggests that the DAO will dedicate a special vault with 50k BPRO to be used by the multisig if and only if payouts are needed to be made to bug hunters of the Immunefi program.

Summary

This proposal suggests 5 sections to be voted by the DAO to dedicate funds from its Reserve:

  1. 15,000 BPRO - for up to 300 new users, 50 BPRO each, rewarding new or imported accounts.
  2. 90,000 BPRO - using UMA’s KPI Options
  3. 100,000 BPRO - to be deposited from the DAO Reservoir to Uniswap BPRO-ETH v3 pool to provide liquidity to new governance members to join.
  4. 25,000 BPRO - to fund the B.Protocol Growth Squad Fund.
  5. 50,000 BPRO - to be deposited in a dedicated vault to be used for payouts to Immunefi Bug Hunters only if and when a bug is found.
6 Likes

You suggested interesting ideas and I mostly agree with everything you stated. However, two things worry me (or I don’t understand them):

  1. I think buying 300 new users with 50 BPROs will not bring the desired user profiles to the protocol. We should target users who want to migrate positions under the bprotocol because of the value that the protocol offers and to make their plans longer term if possible. Paying directly to users for migration can negatively affect a project’s reputation.
  2. Should we use TVL as a metric? I don’t know how the v2 protocol will be aligned with the current model so I wouldn’t go into details but the current revenue model requires riskier positions so logically we need incetivize and measure debt side. For example, TVL for Compound is important because that protocol make profits from difference on IRS, but what TVL means for Bprotocol?

One-sided liquidity is great idea.

In what way? Can you elaborate a little on why you consider this to be detrimental to the protocol. I would think that directly rewarding any user regardless of their underlying motivations is important considering they are contributing to the protocol.

What KPI do you think is more meaningful than TVL?

1 Like

50 is probably large enough that you’ll get a sybil attack via washing through centralized exchanges. I’m pretty sure I could end up well ahead utilizing 10 free monthly Gemini withdrawals and cheap nightly gas. This also further incentivizes the Growth Squad members to sybil attack the platform themselves. I just mentioned that in the Growth Squad thread. If the Growth Squad wants to use 15k to drive users to the platform, it should come out of their budget/rewards. The current design of the Growth Squad and these emissions is very scary.

I’d base it on maintaining $10k of debt, not deposits. We need debtors and that at least requires more gas spending. I’d probably cut it in half (you only want to partially offset a reasonable gas expenditure to avoid sybil) and double the number (25 to 600 address).

I’m hoping this means no LP rewards and 30k is solely for users of BProtocol. There’s no reason to have the DAO LPing and paying people to LP when there’s little demand to trade BPRO.

Keeper just launched their competing product and it’s being subsidized with token emissions purely based on debt, so drastically cutting BPro emissions right now could lead to a lot of capital migration. Unless the perverse incentives for the Growth Squad can be fixed, I’d rather delay implementing and instead just take that 25k and use it to boost emissions to users directly.

2 Likes

Hello Guys, I loved this one but why not make it like a farm? people LP their bpros and you give them BPRO conditionally, Like they keep 3months they get high APY… something like this so people who hold BPRO they have options not to sell and keep their Bpros… its just an idea … I know Bpro is govern token not a utility or trading token but imagine people like me who like bpro and keep theirs now will get a chance to put it on work. its like DOUBLE KILL for me !

3 Likes

What guarantees do we have that the growth squad wont turn out like the Dash Force thing what basically killed the Dash community?

1 Like

we have no guarantee and I don’t think we need it. Some community members are already gained credibility based on their contribution without rewards. Despite the high reputation of the dev team, we also have no guarantee that they will leave the project for justified or unjustified reasons.
I honestly don’t know how the gowth squad will work and how decisions will be made. Will growth plan be made for a specific period of time? Will DAO members vote to accept the plan?
I am not familiar with the DASH case so I don’t know if we can act preventively on potentially destructive actions of members?

1 Like

The money for the growth squad should perhaps go to a professional firm like Ogilvy or the likes and some media buying where we do advertorials in finance magazines. Just throwing money at people who aren’t professionals to do your PR will make you look as good as those people are in relaying your message.

1 Like

Hey Commiekiller,
Great to have you back with us!

As the proposal for the Growth Squad fund suggests - the Squad members are eligible only for 20% of the Squad’s fund as rewards (5k BPRO in total, to be split among 3 members after 3 months of contribution - which is mainly a symbolic reward).

Most of the fund is indeed to be spent on 3rd party providers as suggested in the proposal (bloggers, YouTubers, promotions etc).

There weren’t (and still aren’t) many members of this community who have chosen to join the Squad though the call was (and still is) open for everyone - preferably though for members who have already gained some substantial record in the community since it was launched. This is also the best way for the community to make sure the Squad is operating with good and clear intentions.

Also, as mentioned in the proposal, the team, and mainly myself, will be supporting the Squad at least at its early stages.

This is a pilot to see how the community can better decentralize itself by transferring more and more initiatives to the direct hands of its members. We need to start somewhere, give it a try, iterate on its success and failures and make progress. I believe this Growth Squad is a good way to start.

4 Likes

Thanks Eitan, I will look at the proposal more in depth later on today but yes, as a pilot it cant hurt.

1 Like

I think it is in the interest of all of us that users who migrate their positions under bprotocol keep their funds there for as long as possible.
If from the perspective of these users the incentive for migration is the $ 100 (-gas fee) position and not the functionality of the protocol then we can expect that most of these users will leave the protocol after the lock-period.
This move might make sense if the BPRO token had more utility functions, but currently serves solely as a governance token and with this giveaway program has a function only as cash.
We as the DAO community should value the token protocol more than its current market price. If so then DAO distributes more value to new users than they get.
Can you give me an example of a project that had a similar way of gaining users?
Maybe I’m completely wrong and such an incentive program really has an effect. However, I have mostly seen such marketing actions on Twitter.

We need first determine what the main goal is?
If our goal is to fill the JAR box then we need to focus on debt metrics or lend-borrow ratio.
If the JAR box is empty, what is the reason why users would keep their positions under the B protocol? (except constant sell-off BPRO).
If TVL is high and no liquidation is carried out, will it positively affect the protocol?
With constant sell-off the market price of the token will fall and the LM distribution rewards will be less and less in the $ denomination.

2 Likes

Relating to item 3 indirectly really - I think it would be smart to partner with Visor Finance which is a very interesting project that is constantly adding new pairs to their application which provide liquidity in Uniswap V3 and uses an NFT standard to interact with Uniswap. The only downside I can think of is that it would mean that anyone that isn’t using Visor already will incur more tx fees to mint their NFT vault just to provide liquidity for BPRO but partnering would bring visibility of BProtocol to that community too. They already allow a single sided entry method but to be fair it is really just trading half of the provided coins to the other coin in the pair then completing the deposit to Uniswap - so it isn’t truly a single sided deposit because that would not be earning fees because it is outside of the price range. An additional reward for using Visor is that they have a project called Gamma which is actively managing the position in Uniswap V3 which is able to maximize the fees earned from the pool. The current strategy is using bollinger bands to determine the upper and lower prices to select in the uniswap v3 position and since it’s actively managed it is much more narrow than most LP providers while continuously earning fees since most people aren’t going to actively change their position in Uniswap and incur the fees for doing so - typical positions are very wide ranging in the price selections which earns much less in fees as I understand it.

Other issues with this idea is that adding liquidity via visor does not add the token received from Uniswap representing your position to your wallet so that can’t be staked in b protocol to earn BPRO for utilizing this program. I believe there is a visor specific token that represents your position in the visor pool which could be staked in b protocol to earn BPRO hypothetically.

Anyway, it was just a thought because I really enjoy both of these projects and it seemed like an option in which both could mutually benefit from additional exposure and you can certainly bring anyone that fins Visor into b protocol if they find that adding BPRO to Visor will earn them more BPRO if there ar super minimal requirements like migrating/opening a CDP wirh b protocol and having any collateral there, borrowing any amount and somehow staking their visor token indicating they hold a position as an LP for BPRO in visor. Or even just recognizing that you hold a Visor NFT vault in your wallet could be a new way to do that. I’ll keep thinking of ways to help bring exposure but let me know if this is completely off base.

2 Likes

Thanks for sharing this @Megaguirus.
I think ideas like that are exactly the kind of things we need to have more in the community discussions - even if it’s not for immediate execution.

If you are familiar with anyone from the Visor team/community, and can make an intro or ask them to join here to explain more on how this can be utilized (maybe in LM phase 3) - please do. Thanks again.

1 Like

@a7om if you can please edit the proposal according to the things that came up yesterday during the community call -

The LM phase 2 will run for 591300 blocks (~3 months), starting at block number 12895835 (one block after LM phase 1 ended) and will end at block number 13487135.

1. Incentivising new users -
New B.Protocol Users would include users who joined during LM phase 2 (as described above) to any of these integrations:

  • Current Maker and Compound integrations.
  • New Liquity<>B.Protocol integration (from any UI, including Pickle and other UIs that might be added).
  • Instadapp<>B.Protocol and/or other integrations that might be added during this LM phase.

2. KPI based Liquidity Mining for users -
It is proposed that UMA’s KPI Options will be used for the KPI based LM.
For that, 90k BPRO from the DAO Reservoir account will be deposited as collateral to mint 90k BPRO UMA Option tokens (ERC20), that will be distributed to Users according to the same conditions as the previous LM. A floor price of 33% will be set and the options will mature at the end of the 2nd LM phase, at block number 13487135. If the TVL of B.Protocol will reach or exceeds $150m, the options will mature to 100% (1 BPRO per option). If the TVL fails to reach $150m the option will mature at the floor price (0.33 BPRO per option), and the remaining 60k BPRO will be returned to the DAO Reservoir account.

I think once these edits are added to the proposal it can go up for a vote on Snapshot for the community to decide how to progress.

2 Likes

I think that we should set a Governance Staking.

As the BPRO tokenomic design, the Reservoir and Dev can get inflation bonus but the HODLers won’t.

Check the perpetual minting below:

Perpetual minting

  • 1,325,000 BPRO per year will be minted into a Reservoir contract, which will be under the control of the DAO, and will be used to on-board new participants into the governance, in any way the DAO will see fit.
  • 825,000 BPRO per year will be distributed for devs. In the first year this will be sent to an address controlled by by the founding team, but the founding team will not vote.
1 Like

I’ve been a fan of some sort of governance staking from the start and have mentioned it a few times to Eitan and Yaron. Need to talk with Yaron more about the technical aspects of getting a formal proposal for it together. Hoping for progress soon, lots of people have been pushing for it on the telegram and discord.

Just edited the proposal and submitted it here