Should we accept Convex veCRV airdrop and bribe?

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 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.

Should we vote for Convex for an airdrop bribe?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Abstain
0 voters
1 Like

Perhaps we can farm the brrr

I think we should, but as their product doesn’t 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.

1 Like

I changed the poll (added abstain option), sorry for inconvenience, pls revote.

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 don’t personally have a strong opinion either way yet on this but looking forward to reading others thoughts.


This is also my question.

Even if we vote NO, do you think it’s will change the outcome of the vote. Because if it’s not the case, we will then miss the airdrop.

Also is there conditions (like Epsilon) , where Yearn won’t be eligible if we chose to dump the token ?

I guess 1% is not that much anyway. So it will probably don’t make a big difference.

1 Like

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 ‘yes’ so we get something out of it.


Yep this is also my POV. Don’t really see a strong argument to vote against.

1 Like

It smells kinda like another SDT (copycat, with some notable backing, but didn’t really end well) . If it repeats what SDT did, we’ll probably get some airdrop out of it before the project kinda dwindles.

Vote for to get on Curve’s 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 yearn’s moat.

Action/consequence tree:

Vote for:

  1. Project succeeds:
    1.1. Project succeeds and competes with yearn - bad
    1.2. Project succeeds and cooperates/adds value to yearn - good
  2. 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 isn’t worth much. - neutral
    2.3. yearn absorbs some talent from Convex - good/neutral

Vote against:

  1. Vote passes anyway:
    1.1. Project succeeds but is hostile against yearn. - bad
    1.2. Project fails. - neutral
  2. Vote doesn’t pass:
    2.1. Nothing gained. - neutral
    2.2. Curve holds a grudge. - bad
    2.3. Curve doesn’t 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.


I think SDT never did an airdrop to those who voted them in.


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. I’d 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 can’t 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 “complications” or “lack of time”.

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 don’t 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, don’t ruin one of Yearn’s moats for the sake of a small bribe from some random new project that hasn’t proven itself competent yet.

Edit: Also, I don’t 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.


Yeah they didn’t, I just thought they were similar since they’re both backed by Julien and copied yearn’s moat.

1 Like

Imo such competition will prove more troublesome for smaller aggregators, not for Yearn. Take the airdrop i think


In meat space this kind of thing happens all the time, except it’s 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 :slight_smile:

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. Let’s not let any water out of the moat for small bribe, are we that confident our castle is impenetrable?

1 Like

Vote no and move on.

1 Like

So YES won ?
did we already vote ?

vote is online: CIP#57 Whitelist The Convex Protocol - Proposals - Governance

1 Like

Since our vote won’t affect the outcome, we’ve queued a yes vote.


This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.