Requesting 11.4% of token supply with vested distributed to contributors who’ve been historically under compensated. Two year vesting with semi-annual community review of continued alignment/commitment with the project. Multisig creation for DAO transfer to Optimism.
This conversation was voted on via Snapshot in the past when we thought we were moving to the BARN token but we dropped the proposal because 20% was too much to ask from a fixed supply token.
However, since that vote the prior founding development team who helped build out BarnBridge obviously left the protocol. We had to rebuild almost every aspect of it. With a band of outsiders who I worked with both in our Discord, the Q Discord, and from prior work experience in the industry, we were able to revive BarnBridge by rebuilding: SMART Yield, the DAO, staking, bonding, governance, and the entire UI/UX of BarnBridge along with the website.
Obviously, this hasn’t launched yet but it is all coming within the month of August.
During that time, we lost a lot of people. Some of them because they weren’t comfortable with the drama, others due to apathy.
When people no longer thought there was a route to compensation or upside to BarnBridge’s success, they naturally pursued other opportunities. Some community members vocalized to me that working on BarnBridge felt like a public good.
I think if we are planning on succeeding we need to naturally realign incentives given the turnover over the past year. I’m not bitter about the people who left, I think that naturally happens in bulls and bears… people flame in and fade out. However, after 10 months of building out BarnBridge V2 there are a list of people I think deserve long term alignment with what we are building towards.
I also think our community should WANT to incentivize these people.
|Discretionary Dev Allocation||0.40%|
Who is Getting What and Why:
It’s one thing to frame these % as $ amounts but I think we need to take into account that these people should have been compensated in this way already. This is a % of the network they deserve a say in… the fact it has a dollar price complicates the ask but this is how I framed this thought process.
This is my proposed breakdown. I know it’s front weighted towards me but also keep in mind… a standard founder in Defi makes around 15% of the token supply. With this, I end up with 5.5% for all of the work I’ve done and will continue to do going forward. I’m ultimately fine with that but should get it out of the way up front.
Q – this is obviously in some part going to me as well since I own a large chunk of Q but the bigger thing here is we have people and will continue to in the future who we want to align with BOND. Further, since it’s a private company with external investors this helps me justify any conflict of interest in focusing on BarnBridge over any other protocol since its inception.
Pavlo, Vitalik, Christian and Stu never received tokens for their work on BarnBridge.
Max also never received tokens for his work on BarnBridge and I think it’s in our best interest to align him given how critical FIAT and FDT will be to BarnBridge moving forward.
Plug (our team in NZ/Singapore) wrote all of the code for SMART Yield v2 and are already working on integrations to Curve and Velodrome to help with the fact that USDC into AAVE is 50 basis points in variable interest at the moment.
Fully Allocated wrote the DAO code to fit the Default framework. While Fully is anon, I have worked with them in the past so they’re not anon to me and I know they have high character.
Zach is a developer who Fully Allocated has helped us to recruit who wrote solidity code for ROME which recently voted to disband its treasury. He is doing an audit on Olympus V3 and coming on full time to work with us afterwards in early September.
Alberto works at Linum and helped us build the back end. He is an amazing developer and we’ve gotten permission to reward him directly to have incentive to focus on BarnBridge over other work. We lost one developer from Linum to Polygon and another to AAVE and Alberto really went above and beyond to help us finish the project. I think this incentive gives him incentive to not be someone we lose.
We’ve also allocated .40% for discretionary development which we need to find and recruit. This is the main gap on BarnBridge right now. Kostia from Q who also coded a lot of the FIAT front end has helped a ton. This may eventually go to him or some of the Linum team. Or we can divide it between them.
Everyone else are community members who went above and beyond to help when they had absolutely no incentive to help along the way to bring BarnBridge back.
It’s ultimately not fair to me that working on BarnBridge should feel like a public good or a mercenary task where people only gain to earn USDC. This is my attempt to fix this.
This is slightly over 11% of the entire bond supply, vested over 2 years using Furo by Sushi. It’s a really cool new tool and the Sushi team has committed to working with us and marketing the use cases of how we plan to use it.
We also could use Furo to stream BOND rewards into the xBOND staking contracts.
We can set up custom vesting contracts using Fuse that can stream out and be canceled based on a community snapshot.
It’s pretty simple to set up here as you can see in the example above.
Multisig per Conversion:
So this part may end up seeming alarming until you realize that everyone on this list is either doxxed to me or is a fully doxxed person. Most of these are people who have been around our project for a while and have only acted in good faith. Or they are industry leaders who care about the long term prospect of BarnBridge.
I have concerns about how we set up the vote next week to move the treasury from Mainnet to Optimism. There are scenarios where we can get flash loan attacked or even vampire attacked on the new chain before people have time to move over.
If we vote on main net that our intention is to move our DAO to Optimism, we should move the entire treasury of the old DAO to a multisig that can also call functions in case SYV1 or SMART Alpha get an uptick in usage that accumulates a large amount of any token on the Mainnet treasury. We would then honor snapshots to move these funds to Optimism. However, the entire DAO treasury, the protocol owned liquidity in the community multisig, and the team multisig will need to move to Optimism and I think it is safer to use this multisig during the transaction so people have time to port over.
From there, this multisig can also control the Furo vesting and make sure we execute the alignment incentives.
When it’s all said and done it should all be moved to the DAO’s control but there will be a dangerous transitionary period where I trust this multisig more than actors who may have been accumulating BOND to attack the treasury before we have time to unstake, bridge, and move over.
It’s vitally important we do this, in my opinion.
I propose we look at this vesting on a semi-annual (6 month) basis and make sure everyone is aligned the way we expected. The standard vesting in the industry is over 2 years and Furo lets us stream this, accelerate it, or end it.
So I propose that the BarnBridge community follows the doxxed wallets and ensures people are still held accountable and are active on the project.
From there we can honor snapshots and change vesting if someone tries to Farmwell us.
Transitional Multisig Members:
|Multisig Signatory||Public Wallet|
|EJ - 4RC||0x1749F051c45c814A9a4fAb5bEC7CF6851A4178Ca|
|Jordan - SNX||0x604F127145CAC2467389124f0871227D3fD6F628|