At 1.25m $UMA, this is an extremely high request - especially as it follows on from 2 previous periods of funding, one of 100k $UMA from Risk Labs and a further 160k $UMA from the UMA DAO under a revised proposal that initially requested 500k $UMA.
Discussions around UMA DAO support for Polymarket less than a year ago highlighted concerns that this may be the first of repeated requests, and there was reassurance that this was not the case, which gives pause around both the the scale and timing of the request, especially as in the previous discussion, one of the polymarket team noted that it was not sustainable for entities without a token to contribute incentives on the scale of a DAO.
As an UMA tokenholder, although I am keen to see our treasury be used to give support to nascent protocols built on the Optimistic Oracle, Polymarket’s notable volume and significant reputation in the space would suggest that it has reached a level of maturity where it can now explore alternative approaches.
I’m concerned that by supporting this proposal, UMA would be undermining Polymarket’s long term growth and by subsidising in this manner may even be perpetuating an organisational form which comes with regulatory risk in an increasingly hostile macro environment.
Like @Conky I’d be interested in exploring a token swap, were Polymarket looking at evolving into a DAO to enable sustainable incentivisation; build partnership between Polymarket and UMA DAO and cement Polymarket’s role as a leading prediction market in the Web3 space.
Note: posted in personal capacity as UMA tokenholder