Extending the GIVfarm (again)

@mitch As @karmaticacid said GIVpower will be an upgrade to the current 100% GIV staking contract. So every reward we put on will be handed down GIVpower program.


We plan to end all these farms eventually anyways. The plan was to end them once we have achieved enough liquidity by other means. We have done that on Gnosis Chain.

It is totally unsustainable to be continually paying out huge amounts of GIV to sustain minor liquidity. If your assumption is that these LPs only hold GIV to get more GIV incentives - and that they will dump it all once the incentives stop - then it’s another reason to stop paying them more GIV. It hurts us more in the long run.

Anyway, I think that there is more of a balance to achieve, and a lot of things we can’t predict. ETH could go up, ETH could go down. Correlating to ETH could have advantages or disadvantages.

We are taking this GIV out of our liquidity multisig (the allocation that is there for liquidtity solutions). Would that GIV be better used in another DAO2DAO token swap? We need to consider the long term vs. the short term here, and I think ending all farms on Gnosis Chain (minus GIV staking → GIVpower) is in our long term best interest.

1 Like

I hear you but I think it’s important to preserve the WETH/GIV Sushi pool, albeit at lower rates for a bit longer, it will be a softer fall than ending both the WETH/GIV and GIV/xDAI pools at once. I think the bitDAO proposal (potentially) and the Balancer Public Goods Pool will be a huge boon for DAO owned liquidity,

I would also mention that we did just allocate 6 Million in rewards for the Angel Vault for 6 months and another 7 Million for GIVpower for 6 months. So on one side you want to argue about providing enough rewards to make APRs interesting but then when we’re talking about extending existing farms I hear a completely different argument.

We also neglect to mention that by the benefit of the GIVstream the GIV rewards we pay out are not paid out all at once, but progressively over the next ~4 years, this softens the blow of our GIV emissions.

I like @Cotabe 's idea of starting at 80k and lowering it 10k per week, this would only extend it by 8 weeks instead of 12, and reducing $ value of emissions from $24k to $16k in regards to the GIV/WETH Sushi pool. I got some technical validation from @amin that our Unipool distributor (That gives out our farming rewards) runs in 2 week round so it would be rather a 20k decrease bi-weekly instead of 10k weekly.

I agree that we’ll need some GIV in GIV staking on Gnosis Chain to cover the gap from when it would normally end until we launch GIVpower in it’s place, however…

I’m not sold on keeping mainnet GIV staking around, I think it’s better to direct people to deposit their GIV into the GIV/ETH Balancer Pool. User’s can deposit GIV directly into this pool without having to acquire ETH. The balancer pool automatically rebalances, however it is made up 80% GIV so the rebalancing would have a lowered effect on the GIVeconomy.

So I would propose then, taking all of your suggestions into account:

Farm GIV per Week Weeks to Run Total in GIV
80GIV/ETH Balancer on Mainnet 60,000 12 720,000
GIV/WETH Sushiswap on Gnosis Chain *40,000 8 320,000
100% GIV Staking on Gnosis Chain 100,000 < 8 **800,000
Total 200,000 12 2,040,000

*This is the average per week, as mentioned we will start at 80k, decreasing by 20k bi-weekly until we reach 0.

**This is the max amount, GIV staking on Gnosis Chain will run only until GIVpower launches, potentially taking as little as 400,000 GIV if we hope to launch by mid September.

JFYI - The total of these programs amounts to about half as much the rewards we allocated from the last GIVfarm extension (excluding Angel Vault and GIVpower), and combined would still distribute less rewards than the Angel Vault or GIVpower over a similar length of time.


Because of concentrated liqudity, the Angel Vault provides much more efficient liquidity than regular farming… essentially way more “bang for our buck” than the current farms. Also, we don’t get have enough DAO-ownded Mainnet liquidity to justify terminating the Mainnet farms yet. (This is why I am supporting extending the Balancer Mainnet pool)

I am arguing to terminate Gnosis Chain farms because:

  1. We have over $1M of DAO-owned GIV liquidity on Gnosis Chain thanks to our token swaps and they are no longer needed to maintain liquidity. Farming is an inefficient way of getting liquidity and was always mean to be a short term solution. It’s is better for Giveth if we take the opportunity asap to evolve out of it.

  2. The extra GIV required to maintain the (imo totally not neccessary) Sushiswap rewards program is taking GIV out of our liquidity multisig that is better kept for achieving a token swap. What if we kept that 320,000 GIV and put it into having needed liqudiity on mainnet, rather than renting extraneous liquidity on gnosis chain.

  3. The extra correlation to ETH that we get via $100k GIV/WETH liquidity on sushiswap (that we are PAYING for) is not necessary when you consider the correlation we already have due to $700k GIV/GNO liquidity that is DAO-owned, considering that GNO has over $2M of liqudity GNO/WETH on Gnosis Chain.

And some opinions:

  1. You want ETH correlation so when it pumps, we pump… and we already have it. It’s important to consider the flipside as well: higher correlation means that when ETH dumps, GIV dumps. We should look to building solutions that add more independent demand for GIV (*cough GIVpower *cough) so our economy stands upon its own merit.

  2. I don’t believe that all users will pull our liqudiity immediately after we turn off the farms, and I especially don’t believe that they will dump all their GIV when they do. I think a lot of our famers also care about Giveth, and are likely to stake in GIVpower or the Angel Vault.

  3. If you want to make the argument that if we stop incentivizing liquidity, a bunch of GIV will be dumped… then it’s more reason to stop pouring more GIV out to liquidity providers.

And regarding GIVpower:

GIVpower is a critical component of the long term Giveth roadmap. It provides new ultility for GIV… you’re not just farming to earn, but you are getting governance power over project curation on Giveth. We’re building win-win relationships between GIV holders & projects… and it’s an important step towards changing the mindset that supporting public goods requires sacrifice. It’s not the end goal yet, but it is a huge milestone and provides a lot more value to Giveth than liqudiity we don’t need anywmore.

Also, we are aiming to achieve attractive APRs for users who lock for up to a year. This really helps to prevent dumps in GIV.

That’s true ofc, but the point still stands that if we allocate this GIV via rewards streams for liquidity we’re renting within the 1st year of the economy… it’s more GIV that we don’t have at our disposal for later opportunities.

I think we should extend the farms on an as-needed basis, considering the long term roadmap & health of the economy. My proposal is

Farm GIV per Week Weeks to Run Total in GIV
80GIV/ETH Balancer on Mainnet 60,000 12 720,000
100% GIV Staking on Gnosis Chain 100,000 < 8 *400,000 to 800,000
Total *1,120,000 to 1,520,000

*GIV staking on Gnosis Chain will run only until GIVpower launches, likely taking as little as 400,000 GIV if we hope to launch by mid September.


@karmaticacid and I had an after-hours chat and we managed to find a compromise between us.

We proposed to end the GIV/WETH Sushiswap and instead to increase the GIV/ETH Balancer weekly rewards allocation from 60,000 to 75,000 weekly.

In place we would also suggest allowing the ETH farms (Angel Vault and Balancer) to show up on Gnosis Chain and prompt users to bridge their GIV over to mainnet to participate in these farms.


Let’s lock this in! Time is short.

Please vote!