Proposal: Accelerating Arbitrum - leveraging Camelot as an ecosystem hub to support native builders

Proposals Finalized AIPs
130

I am sure you have good intentions, but you ignored the questions I was asking.

I would genuinely appreciate if you could answer:

There is over 3.5 billion ARB currently sat in the DAO treasury. If this was to be spent over 20 years, it would be 141m ARB a year. @Woo_woo @frensy

How do you suggest this being allocated? Camelot is one of the most used apps and largest communities, with the largest partner base in the ecosystem, and @Woo_woo you’re suggesting they should receive no grant at all? No other DEXs should receive any grants too?

Arbitrum quite literally is its native protocols - without those it is just another L2 with no differentiated ecosystem. What is Arbitrum without GMX, Vela, Camelot, Jones, Plutus, Dopex, Magic and all of the other native builders? I would genuinely love to hear who is deemed worthy of a grant.

You’d rather the DAO sit on a huge amount of tokens whilst other ecosystems aggressively support its builders?

I would love to hear how you think it should be allocated - with clear examples of protocols and the expected effect across a broad range of native projects, since you have such a strong opinion on how it SHOULDN’T be used.

2 Likes
131

I suggest it be allocated to meaningful innovation of their platform, maybe something that would make it easier for CEX traders to migrate to on-chain trading, on Arbitrum.

I don’t mean to speak for woowoo but since we’re here, it won’t be long until there’s a shiny new project with better rewards, and a better community if the value of Camelot rewards diminishes (this is not an attack on Camelot, it just happens). If that happens, it’d be questionable if they weren’t granted an exorbitant amount of arb as well.

DEXs should recieve grants. for good developments, not to give them an even greater lead and dissuade other teams from trying to build something in the same area.

I respect that you’re trying to fight for your bags but can you legitimately not see that this sets a bad precedent? Would you rather not see the funds go to more meaningful development on Arbitrum?

I’m not against incentivizing LP’s either, maybe if they asked for 2M, fine. But 12M?

2 Likes
132

I agree with you 100 percent

133

that right I can relate

134

how end up here ? Because i realized it was the only way to make wild hand gestures look like a legitimate career move! Hahaha :rofl: ha ha can not stop laugh lol :slightly_smiling_face:
you get it right lol :wink: lol ha ha , nice one

135

I’m on board with the proposal to grant 2M ARB per month to Camelot for 6 months. It is a much-needed boost for the ecosystem that will have to happen sooner or later.

Currently, there is no other DEX on the chain that can do it better. They have already established themselves as an ecosystem-driven infrastructure, making this an opportune time to execute such a move.

It seems like some don’t quite realize that the total of 12M ARB isn’t such a big deal when you break it down.

  • This grant will be spread across many pools. So when you think about it, the impact of 12M ARB tokens becomes much more manageable.
  • In fact, when you crunch the numbers, it’s just around 0.5% of Arbitrum’s yearly spending. So, it’s like a drop in the bucket really.
  • Camelot as a protocol has already shown it’s got the knack for smart incentive allocation and driving sustainable growth. Furthermore, they’ve brought in many builders from other chains to the ecosystem.

So yeah, count me in for supporting this proposal. Let’s rock the Arbitrum ecosystem together. Big yes from me!

Btw. I think that some of the arguments mentioned above are quite ridiculous ~hello Woo_woo :hear_no_evil:

Cheers

2 Likes
136

predictions are so wild, they make roller coasters look like tranquil boat rides. ha ha :rofl: :wink: , you get it right

137

last one liner for the fun :
expertise is so impressive, i can make even the most risk-averse investor contemplate putting their life savings on ‘shuffle’

ha ha :rofl: :wink: , have good summers holiday folk
hope you enjoy the show
bye

138

Wait, inefficient? Nah, you’re just trying to stir up trouble with that nonsense. They’re actually one of the top revenue-generating projects on the chain. Most of their emissions are in illiquid xGrail… Maybe you should do your research next time before spouting off

1 Like
139

They are an ecosystem-driven protocol, so naturally, they would want to participate in governance using the tokens they were granted. Can’t blame them for not wanting to distribute those ARB tokens, because what is an ecosystem-driven DEX without voting power, right?

Such a grant will happen sooner or later – it’s just a matter of which dex will get it. I can’t think of a better candidate to execute such a move.

Incentives will spark interest in the ecosystem and bees will flock from other chains back to the Arb ecosystem. As the ecosystem grows, ARB rises :tada:

1 Like
140

Dude, you’re talking nonsense. Pendle is building on top of Camelot and many other projects are doing the same. Among native dexes, camelot is topping the TVL chart. DYOR better man

141

Man, instead of focusing on that fake volume, take a look at the TVL metrics, you’ll see that Camelot is topping the chart out of all the native dexes on arb. Also, you gotta realize, there are so many fake pairs out there with artificial volume, you know? And sometimes, the volume might seem high, but that’s just because of some ridiculously v3 low fees. In those cases, neither the protocol nor the liquidity provider earns much. So, yeah, sure, the volume may be high but ain’t nobody getting much yield from it

1 Like
142

Full support from my side! arbitrum party is on the horizon and there’s no better project out there to kick it off! Hope this will happen :crossed_swords:

1 Like
144

Seems like Camelot shills have taken over the thread

2 Likes
145

May I present my alternative view here?
Unrolled version: CamelotDEX Grant: Evaluating the Token Distribution | MTS🚢
Thread: https://twitter.com/matrixthesun/status/1674765997205753859?s=20

TLDR grant seems a bit much for now, strongly recommend the team work on its current offerings and ux first and experiment using its treasury ARB as a pilot incentives program.

3 Likes
146

I think they have to improve QoS of their system, it is so hard to doing transaction on their web, they really need to improve their QoS first, thats more important than anything.

147

For me personally, Camelot has been the main app I have found a lot of other Arbitrum protocols. Whilst I haven’t personally participated in many of the launchpad projects, I have always been aware of the of new projects being introduced into the ecosystem through Camelot.

There seems to be a lot of personal disagreement about Camelot being any different to other DEXs, or even being the native DEX. For me personally, it is clear, but I wanted to try and give some objective numbers to invalidate a lot of the points made that Camelot has not had a significant (if not one of the largest) impacts on Arbitrum.

Looking at the protocol’s liquidity on Arbitrum, the % noted here shows how much of it is on Camelot. e.g 100% would mean that the entire protocol’s liquidity is on Camelot. In my opinion, this is the most objective way to assess Camelot’s position, if it is truly the native DEX. A lot of DEXs will have very large volume and liquidity for ETH and stables, but not partners. I would encourage anyone else to look at the numbers for themselves, not only to make sure I have used the correct data and made mistake, but to put in perspective the comparison against other DEXs.

If a protocol is launched or has the majority of its liquidity on Camelot, then it is an objective fact to state that Camelot has onboarded users and acts as a native hub. As shown below, from over 30 partner pools and over $20m in liquidity, the weighted average is that Camelot has 94% of a partner’s liquidity. Therefore, users HAVE to come to Camelot to swap that token (or use an aggregator, which would go still through Camelot).

Numbers are in USD thousands, source is DEXSCREENER
Total liq on Arbitrum $ Total liq on Camelot % of total on Camelot Are they Arbitrum native? Did their Arb liquidity first start on Camelot?
axlSOMM/ETH (Sommelier) 142 142 100% No. Cosmos. Yes.
BFR/ETH (Buffer) 408 200 49% Yes. No.
CHOKE/USDC (Artichoke) 773 764 99% Yes. Yes.
DMT/USDC (Sanko Game Corp) 2100 2100 100% Yes. Yes.
DPX/plsDPX (Plutus DAO) 1350 1300 96% Yes. No.
EQB/ETH (Equilibria) 866 836 97% Yes. Yes.
FCTR/USDC (Factor DAO) 4000 4000 100% Yes. Yes.
gGLP/USDC (Jones DAO) 1100 1100 100% Yes. No.
iFARM/ETH (Harvest Finance) 109 109 100% Yes. Yes.
JONES/ETH (Jones DAO) 2680 2660 99% Yes. No.
KUJI/USDC (Kujira) 280 146 52% Yes. Yes.
LEX/ETH (Lexer) 847 847 100% Yes. Yes.
LODE/ETH (Lodestar) 654 654 100% Yes. No.
MOD/USDC (Modular Wallet) 145 145 100% Yes. Yes.
NEU/ETH (Neutra) 330 330 100% Yes. Yes.
PENDLE/ETH (Pendle) 6.1 3.2 52% No. Yes.
PLS/ETH (Plutus) 1.55 1.5 97% Yes. No.
PNP/ETH (Penpie) 1.17 1.1 94% Yes. Yes.
PRY/USDC (Perpy Finance) 609 609 100% Yes. Yes.
pxGMX/ETH (Redacted Cartel) 280 280 100% No. Yes.
RELAY/ETH (Relaychain) 172 172 100% No. Yes.
SECT/USDC (Sector Finance) 702 702 100% Yes. Yes.
SILO/ETH (Silo) 1100 615 56% No. No.
SPA/USDs (Sperax) 701 190 27% Yes. No.
SPOOL/ETH (Spool) 269 269 100% No. Yes.
stATOM/wstETH (Stride) 92 92 100% No. Cosmos. Yes.
THALES/ETH (Thales) 590 520 88% No. Yes.
USH/ETH (unshETH) 235 235 100% No. Yes.
VELA/ETH (Vela) 1400 972 69% Yes. Yes.
WINR/USDC (JustBet) 2004 2000 100% Yes. Yes.
LYRA/ETH (Lyra) 174 164 94% No. Yes.
UMAMI/ETH (Umami DAO) 650 328 50% Yes. No.

This proposal has drawn out a lot of personal feelings (mine too), so I would encourage all Arbitrum users to find a protocol on any chain that can rival the number of partnerships that has the data to back it up. In my opinion, the above data makes clear the role Camelot has played - they are the native Arbitrum DEX and contributed to the ecosystems growth.

With that being said, i think the exact proposed grant numbers can still be heavily discussed, as well as improved by Camelot - and would love to focus on that, now that the facts have been clarified.

4 Likes
148

Looking forward to Camelot responding to the actual critical points raised by many.

What i would also like to understand is why Camelot have (knowingly) come to the DAO and requested incentives to use for Liquidity Pools, when the Arbitrum Foundation is apparently preparing an actual grants program for incentives to be used in the ecosystem.

If there are rumoured weeks away from this official incentives program being launched, why are Camelot asking for incentives now, via the DAO?

It makes no sense to run tandem incentives for liquidity mining issued between the foundation AND the DAO, so Camelot seem to be acting under certain motivations given the timeliness of this proposal.

3 Likes
149

Totally agree with MTS’s opinion here

150

After reading the proposal once again, new questions come to my mind along with concerns as well as conclusions.

FACTS:

  • GRAIL token performance is getting worse by the day. It can easily be checked on any chart. With the xGRAIL unlocking pressure added up along the way, the future expectations don’t look better.
  • TVL keeps decreasing every day.
  • In this proposal Camelot is the most benefited protocol within the ecosystem: position of power, TVL attraction, no competition. All these without having to increase their own emissions.

HYPOTHESIS (Not facts):

I don’t want to get misconstrued but, “coincidentally”, the use of given $ARB as a farm token would be a perfect solution to those issues. The fact that Camelot is the most directly benefited protocol if the proposal takes place, that makes me wonder whether the main reason and intentions behind this step is to save and accelerate their own platform.
This is something so hard to figure out, not to say impossible, since isn’t the only beneficiary. The doubt is there though.

SUSPICIONS (Not facts):

One of the suspicious points on their grants distribution design is the choice of a farming method to be carried out. Why does that work better than, for example, sending the allocations straight to each ecosystem’s protocols? Why everything must go through the Camelot’s funnel? Isn’t that centralization?
I’m still trying to figure out how does a farm incentives method helps to the other protocols other than providing to their tokens a deeper liquidity. I mean yes, that could be seen as a benefit (wait! NOT ALWAYS), but in this case the subjects are the grants which are a very different form of benefit. So, to me, the Camelot’s proposal is something very apart from the Arbitrum’s grants program. In this proposal we’re not talking about grants but just about farming incentives.

PROBLEMS:

Besides all the design flaws, I miss some warnings/disclaimers to the voter, I mean to talk not only about the upsides but also about the downsides/side effects of turning Arbitrum into a farming party, like:

  • Attraction of mercenary capital from other chains, which is short term activity/fees increase (only or mostly for Camelot) and liquidity increase that turns into mid/long term liquidity extraction.
  • Weaken of $ARB tokenomics = Less holders = Weaker governance.

ALTERNATIVE:

Distributing $ARB liquidity via direct grants not only really delivers financial help to each protocol but also appears to be more fair, decentralized and flexible.
Also avoids the ecosystem’s liquidity extraction issue. This doesn’t mean this method is free of downsides, the major one is the ease to misuse and waste the funds. Although I’ve read some very interesting proposals above pointing to a tranches system and KPIs assessment which, in my opinion, solves that problem or at least diminishes it by a lot.

Seeing the pros and cons of each distribution method (the apparent pros of farming are in Camelot’s proposal), the very first thing we should agree is:

MAIN QUESTION:

Should Arbitrum distribute $ARB token via farming or via grants? Or both?

To me, I think is clear that I advocate for the grants system but only if they come with the anti misuse measures. The use of $ARB for farming should be rejected, it’s a nonsense.

5 Likes