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.
2 Likes
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…
5 Likes
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.
8 Likes
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
Hello.
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.
2 Likes
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 
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
5 Likes
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.
Cheers,
Fernando
6 Likes
Umm, what? (SultanPak of Symmetric Finance here)
1 Like
Wow, this comes as a shock from every single conversation we’ve had. I guess not much we can do except wish you the best. This has not been a great experience trying to collaborate to be honest.
3 Likes
Hi Fernando,
This message comes out of the blue for a lot of people. I’ve been in touch with Symmetric, GnosisDAO, and BalancerDAO, but I did not hear of this.
I would love to understand the thought process behind this and why BalancerDAO and Symmetric have not been involved in this discussion and decision.
With Symmetric going live with a version of Balancer V2.0 on Gnosis Chain in the next week, I think the timing of this message is terrible.
With BalancerDAO going into the next stage, I think we must increase the information symmetry between all stakeholders.
Onwards!
3 Likes
I’ll push back a bit and say I’ve been recently advocating for Balancer to consider going to Gnosis chain, so it is not quite accurate to say BalancerDAO was unaware this was being discussed. If there was a regular meeting of the Partnerships subDAO I could attend I would have filled you in when the topic of Symmetric and their imminent launch were discussed.
Agree that we need to work on sharing information better across the org. Hopefully the new SP framework can help with this.
Wouldn’t one argue that Balancer Labs wasn’t included in that side of the conversations?
I think there’s a good argument that this partnership was at a stage where all conversation should’ve been kept in a public forum, given that it failed at vote stage and as a veBAL holder who would’ve eventually voted on this and didn’t know this conversation was happening, I would’ve personally appreciated to follow the evolution of the conversation.
1 Like
Doesn’t an addition front end team working on the Gnosis chain strengthen Balancer ecosystem decentralisation… Maybe I’m missing something, but what is the value add of Balancer re-doing the work that Symmetric has already completed?
Now that everyone is aware that Symmetric is still building out the friendly fork is there new questions to be answered here?
1 Like
I apologize if this feels like it’s coming out of the blue and I agree that the communication has to improve and be made more public on this forum as opposed to private TG groups. I’d also agree with @LongJuanSilverado though:
Before posting this I’ve searched the whole forum for updates and the last message from the Symmetric team I found was this one from over 2 months ago (again apologies if I missed something):
I also checked the only TG group I’m in about Symmetric as a BFF and the last message was from mid April.
If this has been actively discussed in other channels I was not part of them, nor anyone from BLabs that I know of. In the meantime I kept getting pressure from different people that we need to be present on Gnosis Chain and were not moving fast enough.
Since the beginning of these discussions the Gnosis team themselves made it clear that their preference was for Balancer Labs to host a UI for Balancer protocol (using BAL as the native token) on Gnosis Chain instead of a friendly fork with a new token.
Gnosis has been a long time supporter of Balancer and a big stakeholder in BAL. Now with LM being fully controlled by veBAL holders it’s even more of an advantage to them that veBAL gauges can be added to Gnosis chain.
That all said I’m very open to discussing different ways Symmetric could still be on Gnosis chain alongside Balancer. I’m also 100% open to let veBAL holders decide if BLabs should deploy and host a UI or if this should be left to Symmetric as a friendly fork (maybe even similar to how Beets deployed Balancer on Optimism with veBAL gauges and a 50/50 revenue split). The first BFF proposal was refused and I was expecting a faster return to discussions to address the issues raised by the community. I’m unsure why this hasn’t happened.
All I can do is speak on behalf of BLabs saying that we now do have the capacity to do this deployment and host the UI. If veBAL holders decide we should not do this and let Symmetric do it instead (as a BFF or in any other model, like Beets did for example), BLabs will fully support and abide by the governance decision.
6 Likes
Just to chime in, I was also not aware of renewed discussions around the Symmetric friendly fork proposal, let alone that there was an imminent release planned. I think updating this thread would have helped inform the wider community and enable a feedback loop.
3 Likes
Thanks everyone. Glad this conversation is now being held in the open and stakeholders can start their DD.
2 Likes
We are launching in 6 days on both Celo and Gnosis. I think our understanding from this thread and TG was different on where the friendly fork model stood and where Balancer was at in their process. We were in a holding pattern based on feedback we got via this thread and via TG. If we knew that balancer was considering a Gnosis Launch we certainly would have liked to chat. I hope you all will come check out what we are doing either way on launch next Thursday.
6 Likes
Of course we will come check it out: I wish you a lot of success with the launch!
As I said, please feel free to suggest anything you think could work knowing that BLabs will host Gnosis on our current UI.
1 Like
Hi everyone! here is the latest follow on proposal after discussions on the forum and with several community members from the community and stakeholders from both ecosystems.
1 Like