Symmetric Balancer Friendly Fork Proposal

Sorry meant to post the link but forgot.

Ultimately it is the discretion of the proposer when the vote occurs, assuming all conditions of a “well defined proposal” are met. See Snapshot

Otherwise all fair criticisms. Anyone can propose a new governance framework.

@solarcurve fair, but, the thing is, the terms as proposed are not clear. So, even if it went through, there will be confusion about how to execute this proposal, at least on the points below:

  • On the 10k BAL point: is this a grant or a loan? If grant then, this is a very expensive endeavor for Balancer.
  • If the 10k BAL is a loan, how long do you guys need this for, when will we get it back? Who’s covering the IL? Will you return 10K BAL or whatever’s left of it post-IL?
  • By far the most contentious part for me is the fact that SymmetricDAO is going to lead Friendly Forks on other chains that are not specified in the proposal? Does the Balancer DAO get a say in that? Seems like a blank check to deploy anywhere the SymmetricDAO pleases.
  • Is the $100k coming out of the treasury or the grants?

So, my argument is that there are unknowns about how to execute this thus, shouldn’t have been voted on. How does the voter know what they’re voting on.
I would love to participate in any discussions around the governance process. I will consider writing a proposal but folks who are more active should not wait on me.


Some other comments and questions that I have:

  • I believe @solarcurve brought this up, but why do you even need BAL liquidity against SYMM on those chains? Why not against ETH?
  • What’s the current composition of the SYMM token? Who has what amount?
  • Is there one SYMM token and DAO for both of the chains?
  • “We are experienced with the Balancer protocol, having successfully run a Balancer V1 fork on two chains for over 9 months.” lol, v2 is a completely different beast. I don’t contend your technical understanding of v2 but having deployed v1 once is not an indicator.
  • What’s the nature of the partnership between Symmetric and PrimeDAO. @Andrea81 was kind to disclose his stake in Hexagon. @LuukDAO would you please disclose your affiliations and stake?
  • Why do you need a $100K grant? What’s the current funding of the team like? What does this further development entail?

The members of the Governance Council (myself, Xeonus, Zekraken, mkflow, and Mike B) voted in favor that this was a well defined proposal.

It’s clear the 10k BAL is effectively a gift (or a grant if you will).
This covers a friendly fork on Celo and Gnosis Chain. Not a blank check for other networks.
The $100k comes from the Treasury, as all Grants do. So this is not a distinction that needs to be made really. This is not going through the Grants process (no application was made). It will be a simple transfer from the treasury of $100,000 stablecoins.

Hey @LongJuanSilverado,

Yes, of course

I have purchased from the open market about 600 SYMM tokens around the time of the Prime <> Symm partnership. I purchased approx 90K D2D tokens during the Prime LBP in December. Kolektivo Labs, the collective I’m part of has received D2D options for three years as an early contributing group. These options are yet to be divided, and execution will be based on an individual’s preference.

I did not get paid or receive a bonus for this specific arrangement - even so, I’m just here trying to back the SYMM team as I genuinely believe this to be a mutually beneficial engagement. I’ve seen the team from a-close and think they are the right group for Gnosis Chain & Celo.


Given the amount of input on this proposal - I have opened a new forum thread to Gather more input around the formalization of a Friendly Fork Framework.

It feels that some of the comments are more related to the concept and set-up of the Friendly Fork Framework itself.

Anyone who wants to share their perspective on what they think a Friendly Fork is, what objective we aim to achieve with it, what we expect from counterparties, and what BalancerDAO is willing to provide in return (support, knowledge, access, BAL tokens, funds) please share your thoughts in the forum thread below.

1 Like

Hey everyone!,

Uzi here, co-founder of Symmetric. First off wanted to thank everyone for their time and input, very much appreciated!

When I first reached out to Fernando in December after speaking to Luuk, I wanted to make sure he knew about us and that he was not opposed to a friendly fork partnership. I deeply respect what he said that day and repeated when I ultimately met him and some of the core team last month, “this for our community to decide, not me.” I admire the strength of community at Balancer DAO. I also admire and share the commitment to decentralization.

And Fernando was right, at the end of the day this proposal was for the Balancer community to decide on. We are thankful for the opportunity and for the consideration, and have kept quiet in this process as we did not want to interfere with Balancer governance. Even when we felt things might be a bit inaccurate, this is ultimately your process alone.

Even as this proposal is certain to fail, we will continue to build and are hopeful we can learn and work together while we do. All of our tech is open source and will continue to be, as I know Balancer will be as well, and we hope to find arenas for mutual benefit. We believe in transparency, collaboration, and the friendly fork model. Ultimately, we believe that Balancer is a fantastic project, we have a lot of common values, and we thought a formal partnership would make sense to both.

As we move forward here, I do want to clear a few things up:

• Regarding our relationship with Luuk: We are not paying Luuk anything as an individual in any way, shape, or form. We are not paying PrimeDAO in any way. He wanted to help us as he believes in the same values of transparency, decentralization and collaboration. We did complete a token swap with PrimeDAO, because we are building a launchpad using LBPs on both Celo and Gnosis as a joint project.

• Anonymous or semi-anon: You can find out who we are on the Symmetric Medium page. We are fully doxxed and have been since we launched. Also, it might be google translate that confused me about the message in the Chinese community, but I want to make sure the Chinese community knows we are not anonymous.

• SYMM <> BAL pairing: This was meant to be a way to create a mechanism to connect the projects and liquidity. Ultimately, this was always meant to be a point of discussion. We also saw it as a way to allow BAL to exist on other networks and find a way for BAL holders on Celo and Gnosis to participate in governance. We saw it as mutually beneficial. In hindsight, we should have explained this better or visited this separately.

• 100K USDC grant: We are building launchpads, with Prime Dao to help provide a safer and more stable mechanism for launch of new projects on Gnosis Chain and Celo. And new products using managed pools. Additionally, prior to BFF proposal we started discussions with 2 other networks to bring Symmetric to them. We left a large chunk of grants and incentives behind to try to work with Balancer as we identified this as our top priority, the grant would help counter the loss and allow us to look at chains where Balancer DAO wanted to establish a presence instead and negotiate better terms as partners… The grants page states that ‘Balancer aims to become the number 1 source of decentralized trades" and I believe it will - and we hope to contribute to that!

In the coming weeks and months you will see v2 launched, a new launchpad, new partnerships new rewards and farming structures, really cool investment vehicles built on top of Managed Pools, new governance process and tons more, feel free to drop by and check it out.

We know we have a bright future, believe in what we’ve built and what’s coming next with Balancer v2 tech on Gnosis and Celo. Both chains where we have an established presence and have support of those communities. We thank Rene, Martin, and Mojmir for their public support here, and countless others from the Celo and Gnosis community for their help along the way!!

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. We went with Balancer tech for a reason. It is the best in league - secure, flexible, and innovative - we are proud to build on it and we want to thank the community and the team at Balancer for this opportunity and remain hopeful that is not goodbye - but a see you later!!


I believe that this BFF could go through if we took the time to discuss it thoroughly and hash out all the bullet points.
As mentioned earlier, this went to a vote so quickly that we don’t even know which point stuck out for the voters.

I’d suggest running a series of forum polls to gauge the popularity of each bullet point.
I also encourage those who voted no to come out voice the areas that they think need modification.

For myself,

  • I don’t quite see a point in having BAL/SYMM liquidity in those chains. That’s regarding the purpose of the BAL grant.
  • Regarding whether there should even be a BAL grant all together, I would say no. There’s no precedent for this with previous BFFs and it’s not a part of the BFF framework. The treasury subDAO could contemplate a treasury swap through their framework.
  • The grant should go through the grant committee separately and shouldn’t be lumped into the BFF proposal as there’s no precedent for it, neither is it something that was a part of the BFF framework.

I don’t think these should be sticky points for the Symmetric side. If they are, would love to hear why they’re a deal breaker.


MakerMan here Maker delegate and Gnosis/Symmetric etc. investor DAO participant/voter.

At this time I am still anon but rest assured I am a person that doesn’t dump anon’s willy nilly.

I have been with Maker pretty much since launch of MCD and am now an approved and paid Maker Delegate proper. I took on the whole Black Thursday situation both to help people who lost funds vent, and provide as much information to the community about what happened and how compensation might proceed. The goal here wasn’t to get compensation but to allow the DAO to speak. I believe that goal was satisfied even though compensation proposal ultimately failed. In my delegate platform my core mission statement is:

My service to Maker involves the following commitments:

  • In good and bad economic times, look out for the all the important Maker work-economic stakeholders (MKR holders, vault owners, DAI holder and users, MakerDAO, DeFI in general etc.).
  • To looking at the system of Maker from both the internal microcosms of contracts, people, operations to the greater macrocosms of DeFI and the real world in terms of governance, law, and finance.
  • To creating Safe, Scalable and Sustainable Systems as Simply and Efficiently as possible.
  • To growing Maker in a way that is Sustainable for the long term.
  • To use Data driven analytics to drive decision-making to achieve goals. Look towards the future by analyzing the past and present.

The above principles hold for all DAOs (replace Maker with every DAO I participate in). I continue to work diligently to guide all the DAOs I participate in towards sustainable scalable growth.

After a year at maker I became an active member in various DAOs on Gnosis Chain (1Hive, Agave, SNAFU, and Symmetric). I hold tokens not just in GNO, but HNY, AGVE, SNAFU, and SYMM. I work mostly behind the scenes looking at sustainable tokenomics, and bigger picture issues (DAOnetwork, DeepLiquidity) guiding governance with analysis and opinion. I believe the flexible structure of AMMs in Balancer can play a significant role in building DeepLiquidity even though I often talk about 50:50 pools (like the uniswap v2 type).

I have watched Symmetric perform a fair token launch on Gnosis as well as bring a Balancer v1 Symmetric launch and then grow TVL there while working hard to bring Balancer v1 as Symmetric on Celo. I believe the core Symmetric team here has put together pretty significant work, with very little resources, and continues to look towards bringing Balancer technology beyond Gnosis and Celo. I am convinced Symmetric would be a very positive addition to Balancer as a friendly fork both from a team and technology perspective but also by bringing not just Balancer v2 to Gnosis and Celo but other networks that Balancer proper may not be interested in at this time.

I agree with many of the posters here. This particular proposal was brought hastily and without sufficient discussion.

I also agree that the BAL component to build BAL-SYMM liquidity as @Uzi remarked was ‘optional’ and in my opinion doesn’t help SYMM liquidity but fragments it.

I know for a fact that it is the intention and desire of the Symmetric Team to work more closely with BalancerDAO to bring Balancer v2 to as many networks as possible because this team really believes in the technology. We want to give back, but our resources are small, we really want to be part of the greater BalancerDAOnetwork via BFF.

So could we perhaps discuss reframing the proposal.

All the best!


good post sir!

For me, if there was no 100k USDC and 10k BAL and need to farm our 3.5% (so we just got 7.5% of total supply, period) it would be an easy YES.

1 Like

Great… lets find middle ground! happy to get polls on each point and figure out what works for everyone!


As I said I don’t speak for the DAO. So any comments about what a proposal could look like have been edited out of my original post.

Looks like a proposal will have to be redrafted, then agreed by SymmetricDAO and submitted for RFC to BalancerDAO.



Your initial proposal was fine until those extra bits were introduced and sent to the forum without any feedback.

I also asked you to reestablish a discussion a few days back but my message has received no answer…

Not much I can do there

1 Like

Hi Andrea,

happy to hit the reset button… just working with our DAO internally to put something together… and will reach out for feedback…


I think at this stage it’s best to keep the conversation public to ensure that the BAL holders are aligned with what gets sent to vote.

Uzi, great to see that you guys are interested in moving this forward systematically.


I support this proposal, this should be the standard for all “friendly forks” protocols. I agree that DAO should make a calculation and that the intensity of collaboration between protocols should be precisely defined in order to at least roughly assess the potential of such cooperation.
Balancer has always been a protocol with D2D vision and should be more aggressive in this field.

1 Like

Totally translation misunderstanding, we, Chinese community, didn’t challenge your anon identity. We understand crypto culture. Even myself is an anon.

If there’s no grants and 10K BAL liquidity provision, we basically support this proposal. And I agree with what @gerg concerns.


Just wanted to say that I do think a formal partnership does would still make sense to both! I’m very pleased to hear you are eager to continue building, and though this specific proposal did not pass, I’m confident we all can find agreement in the near future.

I’m personally very excited to see your launch :slight_smile:

No need to even say “see you later!” You’re in good company here and on Discord of people who love Balancer and can be great resources as you build. I’d love to see you around


Hi everyone,

I wanted to share that Balancer Labs has been hard at work to expand our team capacity. We have just hired 2 more talented frontend engineers and with that addition we decided to launch officially on Gnosis Chain.

Gnosis is a major partner and stakeholder in the Balancer ecosystem, with this additional capacity we feel the time is right for this move. There is no defined deadline for the launch though.

Celo is still not in our plans though and therefore open for a friendly fork deployment.



Umm, what? (SultanPak of Symmetric Finance here)

1 Like