I think the Wonderland 2.0 (currently in RFC) Wonderland 2.0. A strategized move forward | by Wonderland 2.0 | Medium and the Professor medium post compliment each other very well Wonderland: The Rise, Fall (and Comeback) of the world’s largest DAO. | by The Professor | Medium
NOTE: NOT ALL OF THIS NEEDS TO BE PASSED AT THE SAME TIME. IT WOULD BE BETTER IF IT WAS BROKEN OUT.
Please refer to each proposal for details.
Both proposals offer an option for investors to exit at the backing price. I agree this should occur because if we do not, those who don’t want to stay could potentially tank any snapshot votes we have to rebuild. The vote not to unwind was very close (55/45).
Also, the DAO guaranteed that the backing price would be honored. The Professor has a great write up here Raging in Wonderland. How a Rage Quit Solution can be a fair… | by The Professor | Medium. He also details HOW the buy-back would occur though I think that should be determined by Devs as to the best way.
Many are concerned with a lower treasury would mean a lower return on your investment. This is not the case. Simply because the wMEMO exchanged for backing would then be burned. Below is an example of 50% of wMEMO holders exiting at the backing price, and Tom’s ROI afterwards
Also note that Daniele mentioned in Discord that most crypto deals are usually lower than $10m
So even if 50% leave, which I think is worse case, our Treasury would still be quite large for VC investments. Remember our Treasury is only this low because the entire crypto market is down. Less than half our treasury value is in stables right now. There’s always the potential to raise money down the line as well. Forget about the whales. It sucks, but they have every right to buy at these prices. I’m no whale and I added.
Betswap (BSGG) Professor calls for only including the airdrop portion (500m Shares).
Both proposals suggest a new token. The Professor recommends just one that receives a monthly airdrop of earned revenue. This does not make sense to me. Every revenue sharing token/protocol requires staking which gives you a new token in exchange. Abra, Curve, Convex, etc.
The 2.0 proposals makes more sense. It offers the gMEMO (governance token), which has a capped supply, and the wSHARE (revenue staking token), which has a dynamic supply. The wSHARE token is received in exchange for staking your gMEMO in the revenue share.
Big difference between these two proposals, and this would probably be better discussed with the future Treasury manager and passed separately from everything else.
The Professor suggest just air dropping MIM to the 1 token for the DAO. This would be much different that any other revenue sharing protocol like Abracadabra, Convex, Curve, etc. which require staking and a receipt token.
The 2.0 proposal offers two different pools for staking your gMEMO
MIM Dividend Pool: wSHARE is converted to MIM. These will be automatically pushed to the end-user once a user-defined threshold is reached (depending on gas sensitivity).
wSHARE Compound Pool: the wSHARE is converted back into gMEMO through buybacks on a linear basis over 180 days. The user can recover any amount of unconverted wSHARE at any time through the staking contract but will pay the performance fee on that amount as per the chart below.
I recommend just one compounding pool.
- Revenue share % details to be decided by DAO
- Minimum Stake period to be eligible revenue share?
No Rebases, no buybacks
With new token, no more rebases and no more buybacks.
Per the 2.0 Proposal: gMEMO holders get voting power according to duration and size of their investment: Voting power = sqrt(average gMEMO balance 30 days). If this is feasible. I’m not sure how it would work with Snapshot.
The 2.0 Proposal seems too complex for me and this is the main change. I do not think we need the Oversight Committee. I think the structure by The Professor is much better. Of course the DAO would still have oversight.
CSO/CEO - Dani will be responsible for hunting for investment opportunities and everyone below will report to him.
CFO - Doxxed Treasury Manager. He may hire (perm or consult) other reputable proven investors if they offer different strategies he/she is not strong at. (e.g. arbitrage traders, yield farming experts, etc.)
COO - Manage everything not related to money such as Discord, Social media, Communications, Wonderland Forum and Snapshot Proposals, etc.
CTO - Head Dev
Each of these can hire where they see fit. Submit budget to for approval by DAO.
The 2.0 proposal has a section on this. I think we pocked this for now until we find our CFO and include it in that proposal/snapshot.
There are some other items in both not listed here that I don’t think we need to vote on right now, but will be important for the future such as a Treasury Dashboard, Revenue Share %, monthly audits, etc.