Pollen Distribution period starting July 20th

Pollen Distribution period starting July 20

proposal link: Honey Pot

Proposal Information

This is a follow up to fund the pollen swarm again, you can find the previous post outlining the pollen experiment here: Pollen Distribution period starting June 21

We are currently using a usd peg of $20k / week up 30 HNY. I propose we drop this funding to $15k up to 25 / week in an effort to stem outflows while we are in difficult markets, and due to lower traffic throughout 1hive recently anyway. The pollen DAO will make efforts to optimize weights again going forward given the reduced funding. The proposal is for 4 weeks of funding at 25 HNY / week.

What duration should this proposal have?

The proposal will last about 4 weeks, although the funds may last longer due to the usd peg.

Team Information (For Funding Proposals)

Funding will go directly to the pollen multisig for distributions. The multisig is currently controlled by @befitsandpiper, @lkngtn, @luigy, @sem, @Rayne, @Jasper, @crisog, @Felix, @hernandoagf

previous experience in related or similar work:
This proposal is an extension of previous work the above members have been managing

Funding Information (For Funding Proposals)
100 HNY

Ethereum address where funds shall be transferred:
0x94726a37ee00308dbead364eb3d2e10d366949f4 (pollen multisig agent address)

More detailed description of how funds will be handled and used:
all distributions will be done through the Aragon pollen multisig, and will be voted on by the above mentioned members, or any other members later added to the multisig.


Is it capital efficient to distribute more HNY during market down periods instead of distributing more exactly during periods of market boom as to capitalize as much as possible on it?

1 Like

It depends on what you mean by capital efficient.

You’re right that distributing more during market downturns creates more inflation, which can lead to a runaway price drop effect. At the same time distributing a ton during market uptrends is also strange cos then you’re paying out absurd amounts of funds in usd terms. However, lower inflation during uptrends means the uptrend is more likely to be sustained instead of overly dampened.

So yeah, this strategy we’re using potentially increases the volatility of our token. That said, we’re distributing money to people, and it’s nice to have the funds paid out be paid in a mostly stable usd amount.The alternative would be taking austerity measures. I’m suggesting dropping payouts a bit here which is an austerity measure, but austerity hurts contributors and lowers the chances of working our way out of the downtrend (assuming funds are being allocated efficiently).

Eventually austerity means community members leave and go to other places where they can earn more.

We could go back to just distributing a flat HNY amount every week though, and not pegging to usd at all like we did before if people would prefer that.

Probably the most capital efficient way to distribute would be to distribute some kind of kpi option during downtrends. Where if HNY went above a certain price point the KPIs were redeemable for a greater amount of HNY in the future. This would be pretty complicated though and would also require some target value for what HNY price “should” be. Plus it’s a risk bc contributors don’t know if their payments would be worth anything.

Could also establish some sort of treasury that accrues stablecoins during uptrends and is used to payout during downtrends.


From someone that believes in decentralising the token more, I think this would be a really good approach… i.e distribute HNY to contributors in absolute HNY terms and not in USD terms.

I know the impact of this would be more HNY distributed when the markets are bear - but i somehow think this will lead to the token being distributed to the community that believes in the token the most, as it will be these users that will most likely HODL through market cycles and keep the token. I guess the flip side would in bull markets - users that may earn unreasonable amounts and dont really believe in 1Hive may start dumping their tokens and de-stablise the price…

It almost feels like more HNY should be distributed when the pice action is RED and there is not a lot of incentive for members to contribute unless they believe in HNY and 1Hive, and flip this i.e distribute less HNY when the price action is all GREEN and everything is pumping as the price will payout anyone that wants to contribute and not accumulate, but the users that believe will accumulate regardless of the price.

I think UMA protocol has packaged up the dropping of KPI options and we could just use their infra stack and customise to our needs. I have heard a lot about the KPI options dropped and other projects following the same model. May be we should seek some input from UMA team, I know they have a special arm called “SuperUMAns” that are dedicated to helping other DAOs implement the KPI options. We could look at doing an AMA or a open community discussion and explore this KPI options further. Let me know if anyone here is interested and I can lurk around UMA discord to see what help is available.

1 Like

yeah, the problem is less distributing a lot during bears and more distributing an unreasonable amount during blow off bull markets.

Currently we do distribute more when the market is red, and less when the price goes up, that’s what the usd peg does.


I also want to bring up that there’s been some recent murmuring around whether we want to keep pollen at all, or if it’s an efficient use of resources these days. Pollen accounts for about half of all 1hive’s outflows currently and with declining activity and less new members it may not be as clear that the system is accomplishing what it was set up for.

Just food for thought and may be good to discuss.

1 Like

I second this sentiment.

I get more excited about more HNY, as a % of the total minted, than dollar figures, as I’m HODLing, so I like the idea of rewarding those during downturns and crypto winters more than users that came when the buzz is strong.

It’s really the hard work done during the market lulls where the real work gets done and platforms scale while others are asleep at the wheel.

You can’t beat regularity and consistency of projects that chug away at making incremental progress and methodically winning over the hearts and minds of white paper weary crypto enthusiasts. People respond to action over overinflated promises of forthcoming delivery. You could stack white papers a mile high with ones that promised to unicorn. How many had devs upgrade their github daily, or even weekly, as opposed to mad dashes to create the allusion of a frenzy of activity. I see procrastination and poor planning, with portends project implosion.


The current setup rewards people during downturns more than those during upturns. If you made the value in HNY stay the same then people in uptrends would receive the same amount of HNY, but much more in dollar terms. Which would basically mean pollen was most valuable during uptrends.


I feel like It could incentivise more proposals being made on the honeypot site / more use cases for celeste as well, but bring some consequences on decentralization aspects to the DAO; in general, it would not necessarily close the org in a sense but it would definitely make it harder for newbees to get engaged - im unsure wether this move would turn to be a positive or a negative… Im leaning more towards negative but I may be biased since pollen was what really let me learn enough about 1hive in the beginning to eventually become a regular contributor, just sharing my thoughts :slight_smile: on the positive spectrum of that kind of decision i’d imagine these funds could be used to have more contributions of a higher quality / transparency standards, please lmk if you think my assumptions make sense or not lol

On another note, if we think pollen isn’t working to our advantage, maybe we need to rethink the ways in which we’re using it rather than going straight to wanting to eliminate it completely? I feel like it has been more positive than negative so far, but again, I may be biased - @parsley_3d sent me this today Proposal: Didathing and Props Templates - #4 by blueridger - The CredSperiment - SourceCred and I feel like it may be helpful to experiment with these kinds of templates in the hive, just food for thought on the topic


I like this idea. I even propose lower than this like $10k / 20 HNY max peg or even lower. The xDai markets does not have really much movement except the really promising project that has their tokens multi-chain opening up arbitrage opportunity right now.

I managed to register in the Creed, it is not easy, and I like that, because it gives a level of complexity very well standardized, I wish that in other communities where I participate is as complicated as here, Congratulations for that.

I don’t know if the older ones here have any tips or recommendations that you would like to give me?

No worries at all, Nothing is complicated my friend.
Feel free to ping me for any questions on discord. I will be happy to help you. :hearts:

My opinion is that Pollen is a great mechanism to give everyone in the community the signal that even small contributions get rewarded. And this may lead to a great deal of confidence and courage to start getting more involved.

I recognize that I am guilty of not spending a lot of time with the algorithm configuration so far. Anyways in the future I would like to see:

  1. Pollen become automated with a MerkleDistribution airdrop that is claimed from 1hive.org user profile.
  2. Visual ways to represent the algorithm distribution across certain areas. So it easier to understand what areas might be underfunded and we could adjust acordingly.

SourceCred recognizes it’s guilty of not spending a lot of time with 1Hive lately. We’ve been through some growing pains recently, but are planning on refocusing here on partners and their needs.

So Maker has voted to pay us to, among other things, bring Grain on-chain. This will indeed happen via a merkle drop. Here’s the basic technical spec :point_down:

Work on this should start in the next week or two, and hoping to roll it out for Maker and SourceCred in the next month or two.

This is definitely super valuable. We’ve mostly been using observable notebooks to analyze SourceCred data. We haven’t been great at documenting these tools or promoting them, but below are a few of the most relevant notebooks in case anyone wants to do their own analysis:

I’ve also got some python scripts that I use for basic analysis. Most are out of date and need cleaning up, but here’s the repo with old scripts I plan to update.


Thanks a lot for the detailed answer. I bookmarked all the resources to do a deep dive during the weekend. Excited to see the collaboration of SourceCred and Maker :sparkles: