An announcement post from Convex Finance promises to distribute 1% to veCRV holders and an additional 1% to those who vote to whitelist them.
Convex Finance will airdrop a portion of CVX tokens to all current veCRV holders. Additionally, all addresses that vote to whitelist Convex in a subsequent Curve.fi governance vote will receive additional CVX tokens.
Their product seems quite similar to our backscratcher with an additional brrr token, and a difference that CRV rewards are not auto-compounded.
I think we should, but as their product doesnât seem to add that much value yet compared to the backscratcher Vault, we should probably periodically sell it for more veCRV.
If the project appears to be more than a backscratcher vault without auto compounding and a brrr token, then looking into it could be another idea.
I think something important to note, unless I am wrong, is that if their contract does not get whitelisted then the project cannot move forward, at least not in the way it is now. Yearn has a lot of voting power on this and if we vote it will definitely matter. I donât personally have a strong opinion either way yet on this but looking forward to reading others thoughts.
Unlike Ellipsis, this should be a one off airdrop, so they probably have no say in what yearn decides to do with the tokens it gets from airdrop if we vote for the whitelisting.
And they will have the team backing, so they will probably get the vote anyway. My vote goes to âyesâ so we get something out of it.
It smells kinda like another SDT (copycat, with some notable backing, but didnât really end well) . If it repeats what SDT did, weâll probably get some airdrop out of it before the project kinda dwindles.
Vote for to get on Curveâs good side and hope it ends up just like another SDT (or we absorb some talent from Convex)? Or vote no because it potentially competes with yearnâs moat.
Action/consequence tree:
Vote for:
Project succeeds:
1.1. Project succeeds and competes with yearn - bad
1.2. Project succeeds and cooperates/adds value to yearn - good
Project fails:
2.1. yearn gets some airdrop which it sells for some extra gains. - good/neutral
2.2. yearn gets some airdrop which it held but isnât worth much. - neutral
2.3. yearn absorbs some talent from Convex - good/neutral
Vote against:
Vote passes anyway:
1.1. Project succeeds but is hostile against yearn. - bad
1.2. Project fails. - neutral
Vote doesnât pass:
2.1. Nothing gained. - neutral
2.2. Curve holds a grudge. - bad
2.3. Curve doesnât hold a grudge. - neutral
Abstain: remain neutral
You can assign the probability of each happening yourself. I was thinking of abstaining or voting no. But the tree convinced me we should go with either voting for or abstaining since voting no has neutral/bad outcomes whereas voting for has neutral/good outcomes.
If we vote no, will that be a deciding factor for Convex ?
Personally I see no value in Convex, they will be doing basically the same thing as yearn in curve pools. Iâd rather have that CRV stake in the backscratcher Vault than in their vault. They will incentive their vaults so they ll have more APY than yearn at least in the short term (like Harvest does).
If we can sway the vote I vote no, if we canât I vote yes so we get something.
Remember, they could just be LARPing about the airdrop to voters and not do it as planned due to âcomplicationsâ or âlack of timeâ.
Why should they get whitelisted so early? Yearn had to have significant TVL in curve LP before being added to the whitelist. They should start out unboosted and without DAO voting approval just like we did and then prove they provide enough value to CRV to warrant a whitelist.
We donât even know who these people are and whether they can stick to an idea for more than a couple months, why would we whitelist them at this point?
Imo, donât ruin one of Yearnâs moats for the sake of a small bribe from some random new project that hasnât proven itself competent yet.
Edit: Also, I donât really appreciate the bribe mechanic here. It is using game theory against the vote holders. Everyone will want to wait and see if they can just vote yes at the end to get the bribe without impacting the end results.
In meat space this kind of thing happens all the time, except itâs behind closed doors and usually only 1 person benefits. I love that we as a community get to decide whether to take the bribe or not
I do agree that competition would be more troublesome for smaller aggregators, but this is defi and lots of degens plow capital into any new project. Letâs not let any water out of the moat for small bribe, are we that confident our castle is impenetrable?
