I would like to propose swapping 50,000 DAI worth of GIV tokens for 50,000 DAI worth of xNODE.
This xNODE would be used to create a xNODE/GIV LP position on Honeyswap.
This would effectively become the first viable LP position for xNODE, currently there is less than 2k liquidity for xNODE.
Hey @mitch!
I think it’s a great idea. At the moment there is a GNO / NODE pool which is almost 400k deep, and we are planning to incentivize another pool as per this post.
Nevertheless, creating connections between DAOs that are aligned in the ecosystem is a great idea on its own. Can you explain a little how this would work?
The immediate advantages I see are:
The DAOs would split the LPs and generate fees from the trades.
Establishing a liquidity link between both DAOs generates correlations in prices and reductions in volatility, strengthening both positions
I definitely could not find this pool on my first pass on honeyswap analytics.
In effect Giveth and DappNode would swap 50k DAI worth of their tokens (GIV, NODE respectively). Giveth has a large sum of GIV earmarked for LP opportunities so we would take another 50k of GIV from our Liquidity Multisig to make a 100k NODE/GIV LP which would be held by the same Giveth owned multisig. DappNode has total liberty to do as they wish with their GIV tokens, stake them in the GIVfarm, participate in the GIVgarden; however ideally DappNode would follow suit and create their own GIV/NODE LP held by their own DAO create an even stronger bridge.
I’m in favour of DAO’s holding their own LP positions rather than creating sub-DAOs because
a. It reduces the admin overheard of managing a sub-DAO for every partnership made.
b. Neither party is directly beholden to the other to manage their portion of an LP position, a DAO has sovereignty over its liquidity. Social reputation is the main mechanism for each DAO to maintain or modify its LP positions.
Gotcha! Excellent explanations.
In order to avoid price manipulations, we should decide on a past point - potentially the average price of the last 7 days - which would give us a swap of 191,313.94 NODE for 124,230.55 GIV
Please see the numbers here - data sourced from Coingecko.
The proposal on DAppNodeDAO’s snapshot should include also 191,313.94 NODE to create the liquidity pool.
With a couple days left in the voting, the proposal is currently losing.
I’m curious if people want to share the pros and cons of the proposal.
I’m of the opinion that more liquidity pools are good overall. The make the token more valuable, and provide more opportunities for the NODE token to have utility. They also mean more chances to earn commissions on the liquidity.
Are there specific reasons people have for voting no?
To clarify DappNode would need to provide the first amount of tokens to swap with Giveth and then need to further provide an equal amount to create the 50/50 GIV/xNODE LP - This LP would then be held solely by DappNode.
Giveth will also do the same process with GIV and hold its own LP in its DAO - this means that each DAO would have custody over its LP tokens instead of creating a sub DAO for the sole purposes of holding an LP.
Looks like the Swap is set to happen - I’m having a hard time finding your DAO process documentation - How can we go about formally requesting funds from the DappNode
treasury? @Lanski
I’m not sure who to coordinate with on this issue with but if there isn’t a response and some clear follow up from the DappNode community there is a risk that this proposal will fall through.