OpenSwap’s request to build Harmony’s all-in-$ONE platform

Funding Proposals Grants
42

To answer your questions:

  1. Drafted around language from the Hermes grant, we were suggesting that these liquidity funds be given to the treasury with a stated purpose for use and not be be used otherwise. The major difference with our proposal opposed to others is how the liquidity will be used to positively impact the Harmony community and not just to provide liquidity on a pair. Grant Item 5 will support the OpenX/ONE pair as we move through the risk of the proposed transition with all accrued rewards being converted to ONE and used to delegate to unelected validators thus providing a constant resource for the decentralization of validators. Grant Item 6 will use the liquidity to properly fund the cross-chain pools to help assist Harmony in becoming a leader in cross-chain scalability; this proposal asked to fund the first 5 chains and planned to use the growth from those chains to supplement future chain growth.

  2. The OpenDAO tooling / treasury management has a separate funding proposal that has been open for about a few months. If Harmony would like us to, we will gladly remove the NFT Marketplace and OpenDAO Tooling from the scope of this grant.

  3. It is true, we have focused the majority of our efforts on development and security to create a working and secure product rather than marketing. But the lack of major marketing campaigns to this point has always been more strategic with our time/cost management than an oversight. With the launch of these products, our increased marketing efforts will consist of campaigns on various social media platforms based on the specific milestone being released. For example:
    ⁃ The aggregator and pushing Harmony as a leader in cross-chain, will open up a lot of opportunities to interact with different communities on other chains. Gaining traction and support from those communities on different chains will be key in introducing Harmony as a difference maker for cross-chain scalability.
    ⁃ Once we have auto-compounding for all validators, we can conduct a co-marketing campaign based around the Harmony 20% returns on replacing the existing campaign that was previous launched.

If the Harmony team requires it, we will gladly put together an entire marketing proposal for each product launch with more specifics.

Please let me know if this did not suffice or you have a concern with one of our responses. We are truly attempting to build a platform to help Harmony as a whole grow.

11 Likes
43

Best project on the harmony chain! Openswap need more support from harmony!

9 Likes
44

One of the most talented Devs in the crypto ecosystem

7 Likes
45

While i like openswap, and i think a grant should be given, im not so sure about the 300k for liquidity.They seem like an overkill.I think the 200k for establishing the milestones are over enough considering openswap has already an established product that is rewarding the team.I think harmony shouldnt fund those liquidity pools.Maybe openX incentives could be given for these pools so people could offer liquidity.

46

Morning @Lance:

Would you be more specific on the first answer, please?

Thank you
Best,
:mechanical_arm: :blue_heart:

2 Likes
47

I like this project, though I’m going to start publishing Snapshots, so we can listen to the community. Here is my first movement with you @Lance
Will review the amount of ONE’s and how old the addresses are. Also will be thinking about Quadratic voting too.
Hope the community takes part in this. The more, the better.

Thank you

Please Vote:
Harmony Mainnet proposal: OpenSwap’s request to build Harmony’s all-in-$ONE platform (snapshot.org)

6 Likes
48

Good morning,
I’d be more than happy to expound on exactly how we intend to use the liquidity. In both aspects it will create a loop leading funds back to the Harmony community and/or the ONE token.

Grant Item 5:
We will utilize the 150k in liquidity and farm it in the OpenX/ONE pool on OpenSwap. The rewards created from this amount will be converted into ONE on a weekly basis and delegated to the validators to assist in the decentralization of validation.

The criteria for a validator to receive funding is as follows:
• Validator must only be acquiring 1 key
• Validator must be in the bottom 3 for elected validators Or Validator must be in the top 5 for unelected validators
• Cannot be a validator owned/operated by a member of the OpenSwap team
• Whether the amount is divided amongst the 8 validators in the list above, dedicated to a single validator, or a combination in between is to be decided by the OpenSwap team
• The delegations will remain with the validator until they are acquiring multiple keys or they cease operations. This allows the validator the safety of knowing the funds will not be remove to their detriment.

A report of the sale of OpenX rewards converted into ONE and the delegation made to the validator will be documented and available to the general public. Marketing through OpenSwap social media will also be used to assist in visibility of the validator(s).

Grant Item 6:

We will utilize the 150k in liquidity to create pairs on a block chain network to prompt growth of Harmony on that chain. This liquidity will be used to fund two pairs on each chain. The pairs to be created with this liquidity will be OpenX / ONE and OpenX / the primary token of that chain (ETH on Ethereum, BNB on Binance, etc). Additionally, farming will be available on OpenXswap for these pools on each chain and this liquidity will be farmed. The initial liquidity from this grant will be used to fund the expansion into the first 5 blockchains. The rewards from this liquidity will be used to generate funds to supplement future chain expansion. Thus creating a sustainable system to self-fund future chain growth and expansion for the Harmony, the $ONE token and OpenSwap.

A record of all transactions from this liquidity will be tracked and available to the general public.

7 Likes
49

Hi there,

Just wanted to know if ONE’s staked in a validator count towards the vote?

Thanks!

3 Likes
50

Dude. This team is brilliant & never ceases to amaze.

4 Likes
51

It doesn’t based on the snapshot admin configuration

3 Likes
52

Thanks for the reply. So does that mean it can be configured to include them? And if so, why wasn’t it configured that way?

1 Like
53

Harmony should go more fast to approve this grant. Don’t cry if they move to polygon!
Bad projects has been approved in one day…
OpenSwap I recommend you to change the title of this proposal “OpenSwap’s request to build Harmony’s all-in-$ONE platform” by OpenSwap’s request to build Harmony’s all-in-$ONE “vegan” platform. You’ll be approved in two seconds finality.

3 Likes
54

2-second finality approval appears to be reserved for face-to-face meeting only :joy:

2 Likes
55

Snapshot it’s configured at the beginning with such rules.

You can see the rules here:

About Harmony Mainnet (snapshot.org)
I’d say that a proposal to the team should be made if the community wants to change the rules. Rules changes depending the protocol admin config, as you could take a look at the same website.

Hope that helps

1 Like
56

As a suggestion, I’d also like the team to illustrate the associated risk disclosures while creating community product proposals, so that they explain what the team is offering/what people are getting into:

  • A few questions:

  • When the team mentions auto-compounding though LP pools, are the rewards paid solely in ONE, or via dual yields?

  • What happens if there are some big validators in an LP, the pool liquidity is low/there is a mismatch & they engage in a flash loan/oracle attack?

Large validators engaged in this can technically just execute an attack, close their node (because self-stakes thresholds are low & there is no penalty for going out of election either).

  • The funds in the treasury & required to balance the liquidity pools are just 150k in USD a piece (300k in total, or equivalent to 10M $ONE)

Even if it’s in ONE, 20-25% APR still seems excessive because it’s basically diluting in ONE rewards faster in a capitulation environment, with the hope that accrued ONE could be reinvested back into helping decentralisation - But how’s that going to happen when large stake validators are abusing BLS key bidding process as well by bidding too low.

No HIP has been passed to prevent this. I hope I got my facts right, but some education around this will be really appreciated.

1 Like
57

As a suggestion, I’d also like the team to illustrate the associated risk disclosures while creating community product proposals, so that they explain what the team is offering/what people are getting into:

  • A few questions:
  • When the team mentions auto-compounding though LP pools, are the rewards paid solely in ONE, or via dual yields?

Rewards from staking are the base layer that come from Harmony with 10% APR. Those rewards paid out are then split into a pool for example OpenX/ ONE if that pool is chosen. The APR from providing liquidity in that pool is paid out in OpenX which will then be used to market buy ONE and added back to the validator of choosing. This is what creates an APY of 20%.

  • What happens if there are some big validators in an LP, the pool liquidity is low/there is a mismatch & they engage in a flash loan/oracle attack?

A large validators ONE stake weight will have no bearing on a liquidity pool only the rewards from an individual staker or a validator can enter the liquidity pool through auto compounding feature. If over a period of time an individual who accrued a larger position in a Liquidity pool then decided to remove this liquidity, the APR in that pool would automatically rise to attract new liquidity.

Large validators engaged in this can technically just execute an attack, close their node (because self-stakes thresholds are low & there is no penalty for going out of election either).

  • The funds in the treasury & required to balance the liquidity pools are just 150k in USD a piece (300k in total, or equivalent to 10M $ONE)

These funds are not thought of to balance pools rather to create a base layer in the beginning few cross chain pools so they are operable from the start. The issue with cross chain transactions is there is a chicken and egg problem. With no liquidity no one will be able to use them, without usage the concept of utilizing the fast speed and low fees of Harmony to bring people from other chains to use the speed and efficiency become mute.

Even if it’s in ONE, 20-25% APR still seems excessive because it’s basically diluting in ONE rewards faster in a capitulation environment, with the hope that accrued ONE could be reinvested back into helping decentralization - But how’s that going to happen when large stake validators are abusing BLS key bidding process as well by bidding too low.

The ONE rewards that are used to market buy tokens in a liquidity pool of choosing will also have a counter acting feature in that the rewards from the LP are paid out in OpenX sold on the open market to ONE the sent back to a validator. This will ensure no undue selling pressure on either project but has the capability to bring funds from other chains. All fees on OpenSwap are paid in ONE so anyone from any other chain that would like to move from chain to chain in 2 sec with less than a penny transaction fees will need to buy a little ONE. Conversely the burn mechanism on OpenSwap works as such, 1/2 of the fees paid are burned selling ONE for OpenX at market then sent to burn wallet the other half is paid to LP providers. The more usage we have the more it helps both token prices the more validators, stakers and liquidity providers get paid, but the true strength lies in the fact that this offers a service to Harmony and non Harmony users alike.

In regards to BLS keys there is really nothing OpenSwap can do about this other than education, this is why we made a video about how the election sausage is made. How to Delegate or Undelegate to a Harmony ONE Validator and Understand The Election Process - YouTube

No HIP has been passed to prevent this. I hope I got my facts right, but some education around this will be really appreciated.

4 Likes
58

Idk - In capitulation environments, it just seems like a (Yield)^2 tranche product to me that uses base 10% APR, to offer an additional ROR of 10%-15%.

You can build a position slowly with a few large validators, move some money around to affect OpenX price & capitulate from the ecosystem now into BTC or ETH more, while dumping OpenX & ONE pairs.

While annual issuance is limited to 13.5 M, the total supply is uncapped & quite liquid, an illiquid environment. It could spiral itself to death due to unsustainable unit economics (low liquidity to recapitalise in the event of imbalance). This is a type of fractional lending, right - Which now happens to be a Defi product.

Maybe I am getting this wrong, or a bit unsophisticated to understand - I just see the additional rate upto 10-15% offered as too high & the counter-balancing forces not sufficient enough, during capitulation times.

Harmony does get 5% fees, so some of the selling pressure is hedged for them.

2 Likes
59

While reading on the answers from openswap’s team, i think i was wrong.
I believe that openswap needs and should get the 300k for liquidity.I think those funds will help a lot harmony’s ecosystem with the validator delegations resulting in a more decentralized harmony.
I really like that.
Also i think that the 150k for the expansion in the 5 blockchains i think will provide positive exposure to harmony.The more crosschain liquidity harmony has, the more attractive ONE seems for investors.>
It also seems that it will make it easier for harmony to make more trustless bridges to these chains with the native pools existing there
I really like the alignment between openswap’s vision and harmony’s vision for connecting chains.
Thanks a lot @Lance for explaining these points better

6 Likes
60

$500k for products we have from major protocols already? Get out of town lol…harmony doesn’t need more DEX’s and defi products atm. ESPECIALLY not with current state of Foundation FUNDS and horrific allocations. Does this mean open swap isn’t doing great? NO but for $500k in this macro environment…just not the right time…IMO

61

Hey man quick answer of my point of view, most of our products are not really in other protocols in harmony, we are the first protocol offering autocompound and trying to make it even more sustainable and trustless, also first aggregator launched on harmony (we are in beta and making upgrades), talking about cross chain liquidity which i haven’t seen been talk too much either, trying to work a new staking dashboard (also haven’t seen others doing this), no1 is even talking about order books. I can understand the rest of your points which seem fair is a really weird moment of the market but pls at least try to respect that we are trying our best to deliver unique products, it’s not like we are just forking stuff left and right and asking for money at the same time.

8 Likes