Change voting thresholds for transferring Treasury SRM from 25K SRM to 25K b180SRM (from Socean Streams)

Hello everyone, it’s Shimon Newman, one of the co-founders of

We recently received a grant from the Serum community for helping to build stablecoin liquidity on Serum, via Atrix. We plan to use this grant to incentivise support for the forthcoming USDr-USDC pool on Atrix. You can read more about that here.

Do not worry, I am not here to ask for more SRM rewards. In fact, in collaboration with our good friends at Socean, I want to suggest a way to make future applicants for SRM grants actually contribute to the long term value of the Serum ecosystem.

In order to submit a governance proposal on, I had to stake 25,000 SRM into the governance program. This requirement was instituted originally to make sure that proposal makers were at least buying SRM in order to contribute to governance.

However, this requirement doesn’t actually succeed as a commitment device, because the SRM is not locked up in any way. That means that I could just dump the SRM I originally staked at any time after a successful proposal.

This means, if I wanted to, I could just dump the SRM that I originally staked at any time!This is not a sustainable model for incentivising long term governance participation.

Socean’s product Streams allows any SPL token to be locked up in a flexible vesting contract. For example, 100,000 SRM could be locked up to mint 100,000 b180SRM, which unlocks linearly to become 100,000 SRM over 180 days.

Using Streams, SRM can require 25,000 b180SRM (bonded over 180 days) instead of 25,000 SRM to make a governance proposal that requests a SRM grant of above 100K SRM.

So, what are the advantages of this?

There are several!

Instead of being able to withdraw SRM and dump it after making a grant proposal, users will have to seriously commit capital to the long term future of the Serum ecosystem. This means that they have skin in the game, and are incentivised to contribute to the long term success of Serum’s mission.

Because b180SRM cannot be easily sold on the secondary market, users who bond SRM are seriously committing capital for an extended period of time. As such, they are more likely to actively participate in Serum’s governance (since they have a vested interest in ensuring the project’s success).

Those that stake in governance are earning a premium on their SRM as long as the price of their vested SRM after 180 days is above the discount that they originally paid, so it is advantageous for those that are going long on SRM.

I believe that this is more advantageous than proposed veSRM models.veToken models are particularly well suited for controlling emissions for stablecoin automated market makers (AMMs). One of the advantages of the veToken model is that a user can lock up tokens for an extended period of time to get proportional voting power; however, in the case of requesting SRM grants, this may not be advantageous as a relatively small investment in SRM could be locked up for disproportionately high voting power.

However, Serum is providing infrastructure for other decentralized applications to be built on top of its order books, the veToken model is, in my humble opinion, a misapplication of the veToken model. veToken models are particularly strong when there are internal emissions being directed for various liquidity compositions on an AMM (i.e., Saber, Curve, Convex, etc). A DAO that wants to increase the support for its native stablecoin, such as Terra or Abracadabra, has a strong interest in acquiring veTokens so they can direct emissions to their preferred pool.

Because Serum provides decentralized infrastructure for other AMMs, but is itself not an AMM, there are no added financial benefits for holding veSRM other than voting (there are no Serum “pools” to direct SRM emissions to).

Serum can either sell b180SRM in return for SRM on Socean directly, or it can build its own front-end solution for users to easily convert SRM into b180SRM for voting purposes. I would personally make the introduction to the Socean team to make this possible.

TLDR: Change threshold to transfer Treasury SRM from 25K SRM to 25K B180SRM.

Please let me know what you think in the comments below. At Ratio Finance, we are excited about the possibilities for using Socean Streams for innovative game-theoretical models that better align the incentives of our own community.