[Grant Request] Utopia Labs

[Utopia]

Hey!

We would be open to both suggestions here. Can discuss the amounts and edit this proposal accordingly.

@Utopia

This sounds like a great idea actually - we’d be happy to consider it, and I can get back to you early/mid next week around what this could look like! We’re very flexible on timelines here around grant disbursements.

Will also spend some more time exploring ideas outside of retroactive incentives.

^ We’re also thinking of the above here ^, and more of our ideas should be published by this Thursday

[Utopia]

Hey everybody! We’ve thought about the 0x distribution process a bit deeper and have incorporated the community’s feedback here, a few notes:

• As we’re already subsidizing gas costs atm, we do not believe that 1 v 1 matching makes sense in this context, and we believe the request of $50k USD of ZRX on Ethereum is still fair.

@gabririgo

• 1-to-1 matching, i.e. 25k worth of ZRX from the 0x Treasury, and 25k$ worth of stablecoin or ETH from Utopia Labs? This way, both parties would bear the risk, provided there’s a transparent way to verify how the rewards have been allocated.

• We’d also be happy to split the grant distribution into milestones, and would be comfortable with phase 2 being at $10M USD worth of 0x protocol swaps. We’re currently in the process of adding in our affiliate address to the 0x explorer so all of this data is onchain as well.

@gabririgo

split the program into 2 phases: Phase 1, with 20k$ worth of tokens (10k$ ZRX from Treasury, 10k$ worth of i.e. ETH from Utopia), and Phase 2 with the remaining 30k$ worth of tokens, conditional to some program success milestone, like for example 20MM$ worth of 0x protocol swaps. In this context, setting the referred address to yourself when using the 0x API (still with a null referrer fee) will help the 0x tracker portals to display the volume that has been processed through Utopia.

• In regard to distribution of the 0x token - a few ideas to brainstorm on:
  1. One idea that we propose is for us to timestamp + snapshot a list of the top 1000 SAFE’s on Ethereum who’ve swapped a unique, significant amount of volume before (ie swaps over $1k, done at least once a quarter, swapped at least two different token pairs).
  2. Another idea that we propose is that we would give 1/2 of the distributions to each user retroactively, and then require the user to stake their original 1/2 of their 0x token distributions (we could calculate 1/2 of token emissions by assuming that the KPI is to achieve 50M worth of token swap volume, and assign for a certain period of time (ie 1 month) before the other 1/2 is unlocked and then distributed.
  3. SAFEs that qualify to receive ZRX rewards can choose what token they want (we’ll probably do this manually via google forms or something) to claim the rewards in (e.g. ZRX (no swap), ETH, USDC, etc.)
  4. Regarding the original idea around ZRX swapping (quoted below), we think that a claims process could be un-ituititve to our end users, and could potentially inconvenience the user around our core product’s UX. An idea similar to Nikita’s here is that users need to go through a 3 step process:
     • Swap on Utopia using the role modifier functionality.
     • Receive 1/2 ZRX emissions, and swap the 1/2 ZRX via Utopia as we know it’s already going to be done.
     • Distribute the other 1/2 ZRX.

@nikita

I was wondering if there might be a way to dogfood the solution being funded as part of the rewards distribution? For example, “requiring” recipients to use the Utopia app + SAFE to swap the ZRX rewards they are eligible to receive for USDC or ETH as part of a claims process or some other distribution mechanism.

Example: Assuming after 6 months - the distribution of what $1 USD worth of volume would look like through Utopia, we could use the following method:

1. The total value of the ZRX distribution: $50,000 USD worth of ZRX.
2. The value of ZRX on a trailing 30 day average: $0.1982 (example).
3. The total USD value of ZRX distributions = $50,000 / $0.1982 = 252,518.02 tokens (approx.).
4. The desired total volume: $50 million USD.
5. The total value of the distribution by the desired total volume: $50,000 / $50,000,000 = $0.001 (approx.) per $1 worth of volume.
6. The number of ZRX tokens that need to be generated for each $1 worth of volume: $0.001 / $0.1982 = 0.0050 tokens (approx.) per $1 worth of volume.

Therefore, we would aim to generate approximately 0.0050 tokens for each $1 worth of volume happening through Utopia to achieve the desired distribution of $50,000 USD worth of tokens.

Would love to hear what the community thinks around these suggestions!

Best,

Kaito

[Utopia]

Update here: We were able to ship the V1 of our swapping functionality within Utopia, which you can find here: https://twitter.com/utopialabs_/status/1661784971676381185?s=20

Regarding the figma link: We’re currently still working on the eng side, will update next week with mocks around role modules!

@Utopia

• By May 26th: Our team will write an asynchronous update in the forum comments:
• V1 completed:
  • Integrations with the rest of the EVM chains (ie OP, ARB, BNB, AVAX, etc).
  • General UI/UX polish.
• A Figma link with a view-only prototyped V2 solution.

[Utopia]

@nikita - Wanted to follow up on this! If we were to put it towards a Snapshot vote, a suggestion that might make sense is to have 4/5 options that optimize for the right distribution method.

For ex:

1. Yes: Timestamp + Snapshot
2. Yes: 1/2 Distribution, Stake, 2/2 Distribution
3. Yes: Flexible Selection of Distribution Rewards (ZRX, ETH, USDC)
4. Yes: Swap 1/2 ZRX distributions.
5. No: Reject this grant proposal

Let me know what you think!

[ericwong]

This seems like a reasonable way to move forward here with the question of continue to move forward/reject this grant proposal while giving the community a way to give input of how the grant could be used.

The main hiccup here in my pov is that we’ve never done anything besides basic voting (yes, no, abstain) on snapshot - I personally think that opening up snapshot voting type beyond basic voting benefits in the sense of giving the community a more expressive ay to vote in what is a non-binding poll outweigh the additional complexity that a less restrictive voting options brings.

Curious what others think about this.

[nikita]

I am unclear regarding some of the terms (such as “stake” and “emissions”) in the most recent post, and while I generally like the use case and appreciate Utopia’s thoughtful responses here, I still am not comfortable with the cost in comparison to the potential benefit derived, so if the vote were to proceed to a snapshot at this time, I would vote for #5 (reject this proposal).

[Utopia]

Totally understand - I think the key blocker behind this proposal here is the discussion around the distribution method.

For simplicity purposes, we would propose that we would follow through with 1 - which is getting a snapshot of addresses that have completed the following onchain actions:

1. Are a SAFE address.
2. Used a DEX, or DEX aggregator before (Cowswap, 1inch, Paraswap, 0x, Uniswap, etc)
3. Traded at least $1k worth of volume.
4. Swapped at least 3 times previously.

By targeting these onchain actions, we’re able to then acquire + distribute the ZRX tokens to an ideal customer profile. We would propose that we do this retroactively, and inform the ZRX community of the % of the users who used Utopia within the time frame.

[Utopia]

Hey Nikita!

Curious to hear your thoughts here: [Grant Request] Utopia Labs - #27 by Utopia