Hey, a couple questions / suggestions:
- I could not find any communication from Merkl in this thread, even though we’re planning to give them $260k. Maybe they could confirm that they’re ready to fulfill their side of the work, ideally provide some transparency on the tasks required to add support to a new chain.
- Can we discuss more details about the potential success criteria and follow-ups? For one, analyzing the success of the program seems a more suitable task for a subDAO or the deployment committee, I don’t think realistically each delegate can do that individually. Would be nice if there was some budget included for running analytics. At least would be nice to look at the evolution of the liquidity before / during / after the incentive program, comparing that with liquidity and Uniswap’s market share in similar pools that are not incentivized by the program. The ultimate success anyway is “one of these chains grows into a major player”, which can only be measured on much longer timeframes.
At the moment I’m inclined to vote “Abstain” in particular because the vote is for all 10 chains at once and ~25% of the funds are planned to be spent on BSC. It’s difficult to see the justification for that, as I have doubts about the future growth potential of that chain relative to others (it’s already one of the largest!) and the fit of Uniswap v3 and it’s ability to take market share, as most of the tokens launched on BSC are fee-on-transfer, not supported by Uni v3. I might be wrong, but as of now it looks like opBNB would be much better fit, conceptually, to the incentive program.
Edit: voted for in the end, see here.