The proposal is aimed at re-calibrating how FairTrading extra fees (which can be large, or could be small) would be utilized. As per GIP-35, it was established to use them during the 4+ months Liquidity Mining program for GEAR/ETH Curve LPs. However, Curve LPs already got GIP-36 with 20%+ APY, which means that FairTrading can be used as a boost instead: both for $GEAR and for $ETH 0xcider participants. This part is part number 3 of the “0xcider BLITZ" idea which so far seems to controversial to be voted on, so I am simply taking the non-controversial part.
The proposal is to utilize the FairTrading fees collected over the 6 days period to be:
- 50% used for those who LP within that period, meaning all 0xcider participants
- 50% used for the 4+ Liquidity Mining program alongside the GIP-36
The result could be that both $GEAR and $ETH participants will be more likely to ape in, as the possible volatility (and the resulting fees) would become quite big, or maybe not.
How will this proposal pass before the end?
It doesn’t need to be fully approved for the participants to get an idea. If they see major support for this proposal, they will understand that after 3 days the quorum can be hit. So it’s fine.
Will enough people be able to vote?
Yes, the strategy on snapshot was upgraded to count 0xcider depositors. That is, whatever address you deposited $GEAR into 0xcider with - has the same 1:1 voting power, no double spending. So all the participants can vote.
How will the rewards be distributed?
As previously planned, for now all the rewards are updated within the main rewards merkle and should be claimable every now and then via Gearbox protocol main dApp interface.
- 50% LM, 50% to Cider: means 50% for 0xcider and 50% for the 4-months LM
- 100% to LM, 0% to Cider: means 0% to 0xcider and 100% for the 4-months LM
- 0% to LM, 100% to Cider: means 100% to 0xcider and 0% for the 4-months LM
This proposal is part of this: