PIR-0 : Paladin Partner Program (Formerly PURe-3)

Yes I guess this could be done depending on the total rewards amount for the quest divided by the weekly amount. So for example if a project get or add 1M$/month for a quest, this would represent 250K$ available/week, so 12.5K$/week of fees.

According to the tab above, and if this is the only quest available, this would add the project in the 15% fees sharing, and it would remain like this for the full time of the quest, except if additional rewards were added for another quest for example, which would lead to a change of the % of fees shared if that make sense.

There is more and more project moving to a veModel for their tokenomics, which considerably increase the potential DAOs interested, but yes this remains a small number of players. I think we should consider each proposal, the DAO can still deny the whitelist if not interesting.

Even if these partnerships definitely reduce BD, the integration and update of the contracts if needed might take some time at first, however I guess it’s worth it if Paladin devs receive a compensation for it in the future, wdyt ?

Whitelisting partners for sure, but depending on how we vote the framework, the fees sharing could be automatically assigned and updated with the new contract, meanwhile it would probably be included in the vote, except if the 50/50 1 month welcome gift is added to the service

Ok, let’s try to synthetize this and find a common ground for healthy partnerships.
Let me start by saying that we have to differenciate launch partners with follow-up ones. This is especially true for partners who are opening up Quest to new voters (ie: CRV wrappers).

For normal partners, Dydy’s framework seems perfect, even without the first month welcome pack.

For launch Partners terms should be different. I want to pass simulatenously this proposal and a PPP-0 for StakeDAO. It would be a 25%-50% fee sharing mechanism with slighlty different metrics.

Let me know how you guys feel on this and I’ll push the vote forward.

3 Likes

How to define if the next projects applying for this program are launch partners or normal partners ? How many other launch partners can we expect ? Do we only count CRV wrappers ?

It could make sense to have specific terms for launch partners, can you add more details on these different framework metrics please ?
I guess if 25% fees sharing is the minimum, then there should be a 150-200k weekly volume minimum to reach instead of the 50k for normal partners.

1 Like

Launch partners are the ones present right now, at launch, as the name suggests. Right now, we can expect one. The details of this excluside partnership will be highlighted in a proposal being pushed tomorrow.

In the meantime you can support or shit down the general framework here: Snapshot