[Pickle Finance][DRAFT][STIP - Round 1]

Reading time saved: 6 minutes

13 replies, 658 views, 17 likes



Larry's grant application for his project, Pickle Finance, aims to aggregate and compound yield from other protocols on Arbitrum, with the requested 80k ARB to be used for liquidity incentives. Despite initial non-compliance with program rules, the proposal, after revisions, has been positively received and is expected to contribute to the growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem.

What is this about?

This discussion revolves around a grant application submitted by Larry for his project, Pickle Finance1. The project's goal is to aggregate and compound yield from other protocols, thereby saving users time and money1. The grant request is for 80k ARB, which will be used for liquidity incentives to depositors1. The objectives of the grant include expanding Pickle’s suite of products on Arbitrum, fostering community engagement, and strengthening synergies between Pickle and other Arbitrum-native protocols1.

How is the community reacting?

The proposal received positive feedback from users such as ArbUSER, Wunderbernd, Henf, Madbaggins, and Fennec, who highlighted Pickle's early adoption of Arbitrum and its influence in bringing users and volume to the platform2,3,4,5,7. However, Matt_StableLab pointed out that the proposal did not comply with the program rules, as grant funds could not be used for "developer funding"8,10. After the revisions, Matt_StableLab confirmed that the proposal met all requirements to be considered for a snapshot vote12.

Why this is positive?

Receiving a grant will enable Pickle to allocate more resources to developing innovative products on Arbitrum, and provide better liquidity incentives, contributing to the overall growth of the Arbitrum ecosystem1. The grant size is justified as it is believed to be adequate for incentivizing builders and garnering renewed interest in Pickle on Arbitrum1.

Why this is negative?

The initial proposal did not comply with the program rules, as grant funds could not be used for "developer funding"8,10. This required Larry to revise the proposal twice to comply with the program rules9,11. This could potentially delay the grant process and affect the project's timeline.

Posted 2 months ago

Last reply 2 months ago

Summary updated a month ago

Last updated 09/12 13:53