Cycle 1 Screening Stage
1. MOM
Small symbolic yes vote. They are already firmly in the top 10, so I did not see the logic for using too much of my weight on them.
2. My own proposal (Community, BD, and Grants support)
I abstained from voting on myself as a potential conflict of interest.
3. Dinobots
Small symbolic yes vote as well. Having some development around enabling others to incentivize Ajna pools is a potential driver for protocol growth.
4. Block Analitica (info.ajna.finance)
I voted with more weight here to help cement them into the top 10. I think visibility into the protocol is a fundamental pillar that users and other stakeholders need. I like the scope laid out in the proposal and am happy to support them. There is the open question of long term sustainability I hope we can solve soon.
5. StableLab Operations Support
I was conflicted about this one. While i’m skeptical about the value that the reports will bring, the number of readers, and the impact they will have, I am a fan of the work Stablelab does and I’d be willing to fund this once to see if they produce the claimed impact. The price tag is pretty large, nearly doubling from the original proposal. I voted small because they are already firmly in the top 10, I can see a case for their value, and I wanted to maximize the effectiveness of my votes by placing more weight on proposals I thought were valuable that haven’t attracted enough votes yet.
6. Prycto Market Making
I voted yes with a decent amount of weight. AJNA markets desperately need liquidity. Prycto is a reputable liquidity provider in the space and services many other token projects so I am willing to trust them to carry out the terms of their proposal.
7. The Ajna PMM
I voted yes with a large weight. With only 13m votes, I felt like it needed to be higher up given the high priority I place on increasing the health of the AJNA markets.
I like trustless solutions like this. The proposal helps with two main problems. One being the lack of available AJNA for participation in liquidation auctions. Having a flashloan facility like this will help auctions settle at better AJNA prices, reducing the spread between the auction and market price creating a more efficient scenario that is ultimately better for AJNA holders and liquidation participants. The other is AJNA liquidity. While this tool doesn’t create sell side liquidity right away, it does create buy side liquidity to give the market an ability to buy more AJNA with less price impact. These purchases create a floor of liquidity which is very important for a healthier market. This is good for the AJNA token. On top of that, the LP is permanent which is another plus for the long term health of the AJNA market.
8. Ajnajsonified
I voted small, as a symbolic yes. Pretty cool site, but I personally don’t find it very useful. I also haven’t heard from any devs or users that they find it useful. While I support retroactive grants for cool projects like this, I don’t mind this being funded at a later cycle when more support for it could be seen. I don’t want the creator to continue on a project that might not have any product market fit or material impact on the protocol. Perhaps a pivot to a free version vs paid version could be a good way to capitalize on the work done here. This way users who do find it valuable can pay some money to access it. Either way, keeping an eye out for this one. I want its utility and value case to be stronger.
9. Interest Rate Keeper by GUNBOATs
I put a decent amount of weight on my yes vote. Not only has Gunboats been a fantastic community member since Ajna’s start, he’s also done things completely on his own that have helped the protocol. I am a supporter of him generally speaking. As for this specific proposal, I agree with the case being made that subsidizing interest rate updates will make using the protocol more attractive. I am willing to support this sort of program during this stage of AJNA’s growth. Ethereum mainnet is where a ton of user assets live, so I think it’s important we help those asset owners experience more efficient market rates. I think the strategy for what rate updates to fund can be sharpened up to help with the efficiency of the spend. But otherwise I support this short term experimental program to see if it has any material impact. If the grant goes through, I hope @gunboats documents well which pools are being supported and whether or not that support attracted users.
10. IntotheBlock Risk Radar
Ultimately my decision is no. While I appreciate the team’s effort in creating the proposal and the case being made, I do not think it’s a wise spend of resources. I’m unconvinced that this dashboard will bring any material impact to the growth of the protocol at this stage. I would be willing to consider this grant in a future cycle when Ajna has more growth, and perhaps more users vocal about wanting this sort of product.
11. Ajna Perps via Contango
I voted yes with a good amount of weight because the proposal is reasonably priced and makes a great case for sustainably increasing protocol usage. I hope this makes the top 10 with the support of other voters.
12. Anthias Labs Alert System
I voted no because I don’t think this is the right set up for Ajna users. I think the front ends should have alert systems integrated instead. Additionally there is a team who is doing a similar alert system for users without any request for a grant (https://domino.run/explore/apps/ajna-oy238dpmiui).
13. Shorty
I only voted yes symbolically for this one, not expecting it to actually get funded. While I like the idea, the team, and the terms (esp getting a revshare that is invested in AJNA MMing) the proposal itself did not seem to get the support of the largest delegates. I’m eager to learn more about why. I’m willing to support this in the future.
14. Avalanche launch
The proposal was posted super late, not giving enough time for delegates to perform due diligence and provide feedback. Will reread this proposal soon and leave my feedback.
Avalanche has been somewhat stagnant in user growth but has a good amount of TVL on their network (apparently over $1B). It could be worth it to fund a standalone UI for their users though in a world where specific chain is mattering less and less, and intents are mattering more and more. I wonder if this approach, effort, and product will become obsolete in a short while. I am quite ignorant of the Avax ecosystem, wallet landscape, and user landscape so I would like to do some more homework before having any real opinion, there are just my initial thoughts.
15. Microgrant Program by Doppler
I voted no. While I like the idea of a microgrant program, the proposal itself was submitted very late not giving delegates enough time to perform due diligence and provide feedback. Additionally, the person proposing seems immature and unprofessional. They keep spamming about their beliefs that insiders get all the grants, which in my opinion is misguided and can be seen as an attempt to manipulate voters into voting for them out of guilt. They try to place their image up by putting the program and its participants down. I’m not a fan of these tactics, I much prefer to judge proposals based on their own merit and the legitimacy of the proposer. This proposer is anonymous, is hypercritical about the grants program in a very stupid way, and proposed an idea that, in my view, has some holes in it. I’m not a fan.
16. Vesper
I voted no. This is an incentive request for a short/medium term program to pull users into specific pools with leverage and yield farming crowd as the primary target user. With AJNA markets being as weak as they are I don’t think it’s the right time to fund more incentives. I am willing to reconsider this grant in future cycles.
17. TechOps
Submitted too late both on the forum and on chain. I am willing to consider it for next cycle, but I have some issues with their proposal and whether it makes sense. Will leave feedback on it soon.
