I don't like this multisig approach which is why it is a NAY for me

[@7LBk...Gum6](7LBkNDPFNAPbBAmKYLvH33mcdY6MrXDx3DWQriANAkL7Gum6-hydradx) The alternative is no multisig 🤔 or did you want to do it by a ref? It’s too hard to predict price 7 days out vs the speed of a multisig

[@7LBk...Gum6](7LBkNDPFNAPbBAmKYLvH33mcdY6MrXDx3DWQriANAkL7Gum6-hydradx) 

Do you not trust 3/5 of those council members? I like multisig approach because of flexibility. 

[@7LEF...62sQ](7LEFZZZWqMYaGB2FLb5EaNKoKThN9rMubJiSZWzn76wH62sQ-hydradx) There is no rush to buy these tokens. I'm not sure I want these tokens on Hydra anyway but even if I did they could be bought very slowly by governance vote. Why would we need to rush on them. We may as well buy 10$ by 10$... Really no need for the speed of the multisig approach for such tokens

[@7LBk...Gum6](7LBkNDPFNAPbBAmKYLvH33mcdY6MrXDx3DWQriANAkL7Gum6-hydradx) it has nothing to do with the speed of buying. Do you really want to create 30000 refs for $10 buys, each lasting for 7 days? That's 575 years.

[@Giraffe](7MdhKzwvPmvkNv1PQThTPMQLWrxBgKMqcwAJe6EEV2P9uNDv-hydradx) The 10$ by 10$ was not meant to be litteral...It is just a way of saying. But if you split the trade into smaller ones yes you can do it by governance. Even 5k$ by 5k$ by ref would do...Or 10k$ by 10k$ at max. And with buys of that size, I don't see why you'd end up "paying far too much for those assets" if you don't use the multisig approach. And what's the rush here ? These are small cap tokens. 100k$ at once is a lot anyway except maybe for LINK...

[@7LBk...Gum6](7LBkNDPFNAPbBAmKYLvH33mcdY6MrXDx3DWQriANAkL7Gum6-hydradx) Then maybe make a suggestion that IS actually literal and practical. How exactly do you imagine this working out instead?

[@Parakeet](7KejvRw4GZvVjFQEDefAsBRd9iaTjVeUWczB44Mgu8Bue8JW-hydradx) why nay

[@Giraffe](7MdhKzwvPmvkNv1PQThTPMQLWrxBgKMqcwAJe6EEV2P9uNDv-hydradx) Following my previous comment, I am just saying that I'd like to minimize the multisig approach so you couldn't we do the same with smaller amounts ? For example initiate a first transfer to the multisig of a smaller amount like 10k$ for each at max, and then put that in the pool and make a ref to buy the remaining amount by small steps in the pool, with the arbitragers doing there job in between ? I trust you guys to a very large extent (probably larger than anyone should in this crypto world), but I just think that sending 300k$ on a multisig of only a few people is a lot of money involved (not a lot of money for the protocol itself but a lot of money at the individual scale). Maybe I am mistaken because I am too poor for you and this is a very small amount to you, idk.

[@7LBk...Gum6](7LBkNDPFNAPbBAmKYLvH33mcdY6MrXDx3DWQriANAkL7Gum6-hydradx) Once they are added to the Omnipool, a referendum will simply be held to schedule the DCA, and that's it.

However, with the OTC market, it's different because the market can fluctuate a lot. A specific price needs to be set, and the idea is to minimize losses to the protocol.

If the referendum is placed today, it can take up to 10 days to be executed, and of course, the price will be very different in those 10 days. And may never be filled due that, so the order need to be retired and do anenw one, and will be the same

And in these cases, I think it's better to quickly add them to the Omnipool, thus avoiding this multisig approach with the rest of the funds? Don't you think?

[@Jose Crypto](7NzNFJb2pfy2mZzdS2ky8okkXZL52fn2VAvAsc8jigvCtBec-hydradx) Yes I agree. Well, if I'm the only one thinking that 300k$ for a 3/5 multisig is a lot of money, and that 30k$ would be more reasonable, I can live with that...I still believe you guys will do what has been voted here

[@xupanweb3](7J44S3oFMw8UEoaTciaLm7nVWEVVEf4g1TCT8U5gisbCFjfB-hydradx) See [here](https://hydration.subsquare.io/referenda/42#33). 

I support this - I just am voting NAY to bring attention to some stuff that seems arbitrary. 

Voted NAY for referenda 35, don't see the reason to diversify in LDO, LINK & SKY, voting NAY again.

[@7KU2...vtiG](7KU2RinqWYLbdMYXoN9aHCf5fd44M8RCLe36nxnNB1PGvtiG-hydradx) Rather than calling it diversified investment, it is more like liquidity guidance. Our goal in hydration is to defi most currencies

LDO, LINK, SKY -- at least two of them will definitely go to the bottom, and  will update the minimums. Thinking by this voting, the holders have taken up the matter. Stop wasting hydration money on future shit-coins.
Well, now the voice of the sectarian holders will probably be heard -- we firmly believe in this shit.
Think for yourself! Think now!

[@Lucky_Boy](7JzrXaz1X9vYRbhn2jgP42cm8hHQCMiMDG6KMzbMWA95bYzb-hydradx) HDX holders clearly do not take the time to read the referendums, but blindly vote AYE by default. It is highly unlikely that 211 voters think that this is a good spend for the treasury. 

[@7K9h...wzvy](7K9hD1nommKVLE89s2PKPQRPZiKjjaAqmEibp6H7xWmWwzvy-hydradx) many voters I know do read & decide very carefully, especially large holders. I support this for many reasons. It's about reaching those ecosystems, not catching knives.

[@Lucky_Boy](7JzrXaz1X9vYRbhn2jgP42cm8hHQCMiMDG6KMzbMWA95bYzb-hydradx) Rather than calling it diversified investment, it is more like liquidity guidance. Our goal in hydration is to defi most currencies

Catching knives at the bottom is not much of a strategy—any experienced trader will tell you that. Especially when it comes to projects with a questionable future.

[@lolmcshizz](7Ljigfve9PdRqvSjiRGUjVf37rbX3n89ZmaitD2hQQhtLBMN-hydradx) , let's be honest—you’re doing this because you and other Hydration whales are holding and believing in these unproven tokens. Essentially, this is a high-risk operation.

Yes, if we look at it objectively, this is truly a high-risk operation. Buying altcoins through the treasury, especially at the bottom, sounds like a pure bet on these tokens.  

Most likely, some of the Hydration whales already hold these tokens and believe in their growth; otherwise, what’s the point of investing such large sums in it? The question is whether this will benefit the entire ecosystem or if it’s just shifting the risks onto the DAO.  

It’s either:  
1. It works → DAO is in the green, the community will call them geniuses.  
2. It doesn’t work → There will be some light negativity, they’ll say the treasury funds were wasted, and people will forget.  

By the way, "unproven over time" is the key phrase here. LINK is still somewhat acceptable, but SKY is an ultra-niche.

[@Lucky_Boy](7JzrXaz1X9vYRbhn2jgP42cm8hHQCMiMDG6KMzbMWA95bYzb-hydradx) 

Unless this is, as you say to pump someone's bags, it makes no sense at all to waste funds on these tokens. I don't have any alternatives to suggest, but these certainly aren't it.

CMC ranking

#13 LINK
#73 LDO
#3220 SKY

[@Lucky_Boy](7JzrXaz1X9vYRbhn2jgP42cm8hHQCMiMDG6KMzbMWA95bYzb-hydradx) 

I respect constructive criticism! Please describe, maybe you see some other negative consequences of this vote for the community!? (well, except for cash losses) ?

All the three tokens are not well worth investing, and even though bought and bridged to Polkadot eco, there is no better yield opportunity, so it will be  an inefficient investment.

[@7Ncn...aAaT](7Ncn2umxqsBym8whkPJ5Ve9iL1aP6agHnVUPKgE5WirTaAaT-hydradx) Rather than calling it diversified investment, it is more like liquidity guidance. Our goal in hydration is to defi most currencies

[@xupanweb3](7J44S3oFMw8UEoaTciaLm7nVWEVVEf4g1TCT8U5gisbCFjfB-hydradx) yes

We sold a portion of the most conservative crypto asset, BTC, to buy 3 more speculative assets - not to trade or pump bags, but to reach an audience that aligns with what Hydration offers. Please also keep in mind that these actions are currently technically limited to Ethereum.

[@Giraffe](7MdhKzwvPmvkNv1PQThTPMQLWrxBgKMqcwAJe6EEV2P9uNDv-hydradx) Buy TRON or ADA as an alternative to Ethereum - strategic reserve assets, coins tested by time and audience reach. Why invest in high-risk operations?

[@Lucky_Boy](7JzrXaz1X9vYRbhn2jgP42cm8hHQCMiMDG6KMzbMWA95bYzb-hydradx)

> Please also keep in mind that these actions are currently technically limited to Ethereum.

Rather than calling it diversified investment, it is more like liquidity guidance. 

Our goal in hydration is to defi most currencies

Even if more people consider the meme of junk currency, it is beneficial for us to guide liquidity

[@7Jjm...dL6V](7JjmLRmaisBKYS3nYZpXsyZGnnsWr3qkjf4xyjD8YnDHdL6V-hydradx) buy memes

Reason for NAY vote:

**Protest**: The token choice seems arbitrary, and $100k values (or $250k from linked discussions) seem entirely arbitrary. Can someone explain the reasoning for the selection of tokens? 

As far as I can tell, the rationale is that Jakub Gregus happened to list them. His reasoning was these tokens “are leaders in their verticals.” However, I have no idea what that means. No disrespect to Jakub, but are we a DAO, or do we do what a Greatleader says without discussion? I apologize if I missed it. If I did, it would be nice if it was summarized here rather than having to click link > another link > another link and read through unrelated information, etc. 

SKY is a competitor’s governance token and not a top-volume one—why would we list this ERC20 before others? Lolmcshizz must have SKY bags /sarcasm.

LINK makes sense to me because we include them as an oracle, and they are near top volume. 

LDO is another competitor token, is it not? I don’t see it topping any volume charts. The team is clearly invested and trying to pump their bags /sarcasm

--
I am entirely in favor of expanding the options available on Hydration, and should this vote total turn overall NAY, I will flip my vote. I am only NAY voting to bring attention to the arbitrary nature of this selection and the lack of OpenGov discussion (afaik). 

I would also like to see reasoning provided for why the treasury should hold these tokens rather than simply allowing external LP to supply the pools. I feel I generally understand the security concerns, but I doubt that others do, and I feel it should be explained.  


It is important in order for Hydration to become the trading hub for all of crypto.

AYE

I am excited to add LINK to the Omnipool, but otherwise indifferent on the other choices. I have never even heard of SKY.... 

This proposal, if approved, will transfer `300,000` USDC from the Hydration Treasury to `7P1rya6QroPc2kH7vBZmpZZ5ytyFAJ7dgw3ewwfZbTdWTg6K` - a 3/5 multisig consisting of Hydration Council members lolmcshizz, Leemo, Giraffe, Crane & Jose.

After completion of the WBTC & iBTC swaps into native USDT & USDC from referendum #35 (https://hydration.subsquare.io/referenda/35), the Hydration DAO successfully accumulated `~638K` of stablecoins, which means we can diversify into `200K` of each of LDO, LINK & SKY. Firstly, we will accumulate `100,000` USDC equivalent of LDO, LINK & SKY through OTC. By executing this through a multisig instead of directly from governance action, we can ensure that the price executed is as close to market price as possible - as waiting multiple days to place an OTC order could result in paying far too much for those assets, or failing to accumulate them at all.

The funds will be used as follows:

- `100,000` USDC total through OTC to accumulate LDO
- `100,000` USDC total through OTC to accumulate LINK
- `100,000` USDC total through OTC to accumulate SKY

The multisig signers will attempt to place OTC orders for LDO, LINK & SKY between `0 - 2%` of market spot price in order to offer a small premium to the order fillers, whilst achieving the best price for Hydration DAO.

Once the OTC orders are completed, and trade has subsequently started in the Omnipool, a DCA will be scheduled for the remaining `100,000` USDT of each of the assets, before adding that also as liquidity to the Omnipool.

- Hydration DAO wants to transfer 300,000 USDC to a multisig wallet controlled by 5 council members.
- The funds will be used to buy LDO, LINK, and SKY tokens through OTC (over-the-counter) trades.
- 100,000 USDC will be spent on each token (LDO, LINK, SKY).
- The goal is to get the best price by buying quickly and avoiding delays.
- After OTC trades, the remaining 100,000 USDT for each token will be added to the Omnipool.
- This helps diversify Hydration DAO's stablecoin holdings into other assets.

call

Executed

Submitted

DecisionDepositPlaced

DecisionStarted

ConfirmStarted

Confirmed

treasurer

Transfer 300,000 USDC for LDO, LINK & SKY OTC

root

whitelisted_caller

referendum_canceller

referendum_killer

general_admin

spender

tipper

omnipool_admin

economic_parameters

Origin able to dispatch a whitelisted call.

 Origin for spending very high amounts of HDX(<= 50M HDX) from the treasury as well as generally administering it.

Origin able to spend up to 2,222,222 HDX from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend up to 50K HDX from the treasury at once.

Origin able to perform specific Omnipool-related actions.