Proposal 320 (Q5198)
From Nouns Dev
A Nouns proposal.
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| English | Proposal 320 |
A Nouns proposal. |
Statements
1
0 references
29 June 2023
0 references
114
0 references
Nouns DAO is planning to diversify its treasury by swapping stETH for rETH using a tool called TWAMM. The first trade will be for $1M, followed by a lar ger $14M trade. TWAMM, introduced by Paradigm in 2021, allows long-term orders to be broken into smaller pieces and executed over time.
0 references
0
0 references
Cronfi twamm
0 references
320
0 references
Treasury Diversification: Swap 500 wstETH -> rETH via TWAMM
0 references
Not only do I agree with the risk mitigation thrust of this prop, and think that the TWAMM approach is cool, but I also like how itd be a case of leading by example in diversifying into rETH at a time when Lido dominance concerns are growing. Im a For here. *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
*sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
Given the bad buzz around concerns of Lido I think a hedging / diversification strategy here is a good one. My main concerns would be around the risk of adding in a new attack vector given a new contract but it looks as if the audit went well and there is minimal risk there, or equal risk to building our own DCA contract to move a position that way. Also love that its all on-chain.
0 references
14
we support diversifying the DAOs LST exposure
0 references
im with 40 *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
20
(noun40 voting via agora proxy) given the growing lido dominance concerns, Im supportive of figuring out a way to swap some of our stETH to rETH. TWAMM seems to be a legitimate approach to attempt large trades onchain and while Im a bit nervous that well be their largest trade to date the team seems honest/competent and Im hoping that the first $1M trade will show clearly whether this thing works as advertised (the monitoring & cancellable nature of the mechanism gives me some peace with the first trade as well). ofc it would be in some sense easier if we just relied on a more trusted approach for this swap need, but I would rather us try new trustless onchain primitives like this than rely on multisigs etc. were here to support onchain culture whenever we can whether thats in art or defi!
0 references
41
Sent from https://goops.com Nouns Governance Pool
0 references
It makes sense for the ecosystem, we need more staking diversity.
0 references
16
ILLOGICAL TREASURY DIVERSIFICATION STRATEGY
0 references
**FOR - 16 VOTES** **AGAINST - 7 VOTES** **eltonpenguin** | *Interesting idea, but its unclear why we should build this* **profwerder** | *As much as I love the idea of this swap, I’m not comfortable voting yes without a review & check by the verbs.* **ABSTAINS - 18 VOTES**
0 references
My thesis as a delegate is: “Nouns has a unique role in the ecosystem as a gathering place around public goods.” A few things to be clear about upfront: I am a big fan of TWAMM and have talked with the CronFi team a few times over the past couple of years In general, I am concerned about the dominance of liquid staking protocols and believe that diversification is important At the same time, my reasoning here is the same as my reasoning for Prop 313: Treasury management is a slippery slope. Swapping to rETH makes sense, but what happens when there are other liquid staking protocols proposed? What about Eigenlayer? The biggest danger for a DAO is to focus more on treasury management than using the treasury. Its a trap that many DAOs fall into, and I hope that Nouns does not go down the same path. Noun 40s reasoning about diversification is thoughtful and being willing to support new protocols benefits the ecosystem. I agree with its reasoning in isolation - taken in the context of this proposal, its spot on. My worry is around sending a signal that Nouns is open to further treasury management proposals, especially following so quickly after 313. For that reason, I abstain. *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
Feel like I dont really know enough to make an informed decision here *sent from voter.wtf*
0 references
72
0 references
126
0 references
194
0 references
11 July 2023
0 references
