Decentraland DAO Treasury Diversification ( Phase A ) This proposal has been ENACTED by a DAO Committee Member (0x511a22cdd2c4ee8357bb02df2578037ffe8a4d8d)

Decided to change my vote to Yes. I look forward to the results and careful monitoring of these funds. The materiality of the unused funds being converted to ETH should not impact MANA. Although 50% is more than what I would do, it is not as substantial as a 20M Mana sell off. I'd recommend some documentation on when these transactions occur and careful accounting of the cost basis.

Mana should be the only coin held for the benefit of investors. What's next how about we just sell all Mana and buy Nifty Island? Zero faith, zero loyalty, zero integrity. This will be a vector for insider trading too. Do we get to know the day before the big sell? Why not? When mana is the only holding we will get people working their hardest to protect its value.

I've reconsidered my vote and agree that diversifying is essential. We aren't locked into a single strategy; we can always adapt/stop by submitting new proposals. IMO we also need to recruit specialists to streamline the DAO's financial management. To bring more efficient decision-making process considering DAO nature, we could establish financial framework, defining the scope of work and approved strategies for financial experts to implement and execute. This approach has been adopted by ENS for their endowment fund.

Hi @maryana.. Another phase should come after this, because we have the opportunity to accumulate stable coins (USD) during the bull run. This chance comes once every four years. If we miss the opportunity to make a small profit for the DAO in stable coins during this cycle, the next opportunity won't come until four years later. * Management and accounting are essential. I am aware of that, but It's worth mentioning that I've observed @web3nit doing great work by contacting many companies and agencies to handle these issues, But as we both witnessed in the last session, the DAO mechanism is not conducive to efficient decision-making due to the numbers of proposals needed for each decision. * Regarding the 25:% or 50 % i responded here before where you can check back : https://forum.decentraland.org/t/dao-6c34f32-decentraland-dao-treasury-diversification/21469/7?u=rizk * Technically, over the next few months, if we wish to stop this process for any reason, we can simply submit a proposal to do it, just as we did in the DAO when we used to buy land on a monthly basis, or when any 'Professional Team' were to come in, although we both doubts about that possibility. * I would like to mention that I have already discussed with the Governance Squad @ginoct the possibility of adding a quarterly budget filter to the DAO page, which would enhance transparency for everyone. Additionally, all quarterly grants are recorded and documented with the GSS @zino, as I have also discussed this with them too. * Finally, if you believe that an accountant is necessary to record all DAO financial matters, we can always consider planning for it, especially given your experience and vision in this area.

[quote="dao, post:1, topic:21743"] Investing 50% of quarterly unused Grant Program funds into Ethereum [/quote] That could be generally true the difference is work got done that can lift the value of the ecosystem by the same amount on grants. If it's just traded for eth without that work to lift the ecosystem that will hurt mana and DCL. I don't think we're out of projects right?? If we're out of projects I have the streaming idea that already passed poll, plus the large in-world projects agile assembly line initiative. Eth is in no danger of going out of business I don't think from what I've been hearing it will be next to get ETF. I mean MAYBE if there was some threat of ETH going under....?? This is a proposal to hurt mana, crash it and damage ecosystem. Selling is up to the grantee, but the key is that the grants must boost the value of the ecosystem by equal or greater amount.

We are already selling MANA to pay for grants in DAI anyways, cmon man, DYOR a bit before speaking...

Yeah I see what's going on here. The more grants cut, the more RICO DAO has to work with in manipulating the price of Mana causing large swings putting the short positions on. You best believe they going 100x short before the sale. Zero loyalty to DCL & Mana - is this because Nifty Island came out now we just throw Mana in the gutter and jump platforms? So every grant that is cut is going to function as selling pressure on Mana wow. It's like the opposite of fiduciary responsibility - purposely lower mana. Well the good thing if I want more it should be getting really cheap with this policy of selling huge amounts Mana for Eth.

Keeping everything has MANA is a gamble, and one of the worst we can do. (Because keeping all eggs in the same basket, even in a good basket, is not a good idea.)

I vote no - don't gamble with the funds fulfill the duty to lift and hold MANA never sell. We're also on polygon too. Sounds like selling mana for eth to me. So that's why saying no to grants for gambling money?

[quote="dao, post:1, topic:21743"] its impact on our assets and infrastructure—such as land transactions, MANA, and most of our contracts that is built on Ethereum—I believe that expanding our ETH holdings in the coming years will not only diversify our assets in the DAO but also provide long-term support to the chain we are built upon. This strategic move can offer several benef [/quote] lol accounting red flag. Have you seen a lot of those? Do you think a legislator should ever be the recipient or benefit from a grant? To me the setup was wrong the whole time.

Although I agree that the DAO Treasury needs to be diversified, I voted no because of the following reasons: - First, more planning has to be made in advance of this proposal passing. How will the investment be tracked (please don't say "its on the blockchain" because there is more financial responsibility required than that), how can the 50% be adjusted based on the market in the most efficient way? Is it a restricted asset (I.e. cant be touched for DAO operations for X period of time)? **Update 1/27:** More planning on the % allotment & budgeting how much ETH will be purchased in the future. I'm just nervous to certify 50%. SIMPLY PUT, the DAO committee is not competent enough to make these decisions AND - CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The DAO signers, from a segregation of duties perspective, SHOULD NOT have the single power to safeguard the treasury assets, make the financial investments decisions, record on the financial decisions, and sign the transactions. This is a major ACCOUNTING red flag. **Update 1/27:** Technically the community is the one certifying this proposal, not the DAO Committee. Additionally, 50% in just Ethereum is not smart. Diversify it with other stable coins. The % itself shouldn't be the benchmark investment either. **Update 1/27:** I think ETH should only represent about 25%. 25% won't be too aggressive when MANA value is down. Again, I'd like to see the Treasury be diversified, but not by the DAO signers. Great idea, wrong team. I'd recommend a treasury team to advise the DAO commitee/governance squad with these decisions. **Update 1/27:** I realize this won't happen anytime soon.