Here is our referral link for those interested in restaking

with Kelp (you'll be supporting Flywheel too) 🙂 https://www.kelpdao.xyz/?utm_source=flywheeldefi

Does income derived from affiliate links like this reduce the flywheel budget that was requested from the FraxDao? These efforts would be a great way to offset the flywheel team’s budget and allow the team to have less budgetary needs in the future. Separately, if there is income derived from affiliate and other relationships, are those items catalogued anywhere for veFXS holders to review before the next budgetary vote?

The referral links are for points which I assume will be redeemed for something more liquid at a later date. This (along with other efforts) will be a great way to supplement and diversify our revenue sources!

Therefore, if flywheel makes $100k when points can be converted, flywheel will return $100k to the requested budget? And, will all of that be transparent? How much revenue flywheel makes outside of the grant? Previously, you mentioned that flywheel is a Subdao. With “dao”, would we expect full transparency to all revenue streams?

No, if Flywheel has points converted that does not mean we are returning $100k of the requested budget. The points will be converted on-chain so everyone can see the progress we have made. We will gladly show all revenue streams outside of Frax.

Ok, for confirmation- on top of existing budget requested from FraxDao to grow the presence of flywheel, any and all additional income that comes as a benefit to the increased presence will be pocketed by flywheel.

The budget requested from FraxDAO is meant to grow the presence and understanding of Frax. And yes, additional activities Flywheel does to support itself will go to Flywheel.

So, flywheel could ask for $500k from FraxDao and potentially make $5M in other revenue. Interesting…

And, yes, if flywheel is calling itself a dao, I would expect for all revenue to be transparent

they just said they would

I look forward to seeing that happen

That (returning raised funds) seems like an odd assumption to make...certainly a plain reading of the proposal does not suggest that. Perhaps you are asking a leading question in order to solicit a response. Shrug. Anyway, I just want to say my peace. I get that people took issue with the proposal but we voted and are moving forward. Your questions *seem* somewhat backward looking and spiteful, rather than asked out of legit concern. I might be wrong, just want to state how it comes off to me. Maybe there is a different way to ask them? I think we should commit and move forward.

To me, it seems as though you are responding to 1 comment in a thread of a previous question discussing “other” revenue streams of flywheel. What you responded to was not an “assumption,” but a follow up for clarification. There have been comments from the community on previous investments and more transparency. I don’t recall the protocol, but, Frax invested in some protocol who later pivoted into a wrapped BTC player. The main comments that I read in telegram from members was regarding the request for more transparency into Frax dao’s investments. The goal of my questions/comments: for any investment that the Frax dao makes, I think that we should push for as much transparency as possible so that the entire dao can make informed decisions in the future. Other people may disagree which is the beauty of a dao ☺️

Transparency is good But now that vote has passed, we should look too the bigger picture of super onboarding Extra fees or merch sales can be wired at the next year when they either make a more reasonable finding request or ask for more, who knows But between now and then ficus should be on marketing and growth

I'm actually responding to the entire line of questioning and giving you my direct take on how it comes off to me. This is me being quite honest/transparent with my reaction. I am all for more transparency wrt to the dao, and you bring up a good point wrt to the btc pivot of that other investment. So if you are motivated in the holding recipients of investment accountable, that's probably a good thing overall. I wonder if we can find a way to do this in a more constructive manner. Perhaps we can find a way to organize such an effort so that it becomes a resource for similarly minded people? Maybe you start a website which adds color to granted proposals and includes direct responses from when you've asked for clarification? I'd be concerned if it becomes a route to nitpick/micromanage things without any real action except words in a telegram chat.