Lambda Gauge Proposal on FTM network

Gauge Proposal Template:


Proposal to add Lambda-2Pool on FTM Curve to the Gauge Controller to allow users to assign gauge weight.

References/Useful links:

• Website (Spartacadabra): 

• Website (Spartacus):

• Documentation (Spartacadabra):

• Documentation (Spartacus):

• Github Page:    

• Communities:

Protocol Description:
Spartacus Finance started off as an OHM fork on FTM network and we spring off Spatacadabra (with Lambda Stablecoins) project from the Spartacus community. SPA-Dai is by far the largest pool with $20M liquidity on Spookyswap, the largest DEX on FTM network.

After the first redemption in April 2022, we pivoted and have been building a basket of DeFi products to bring values to our token holders, among which, Lambda is an over-collateralized algorithmic stablecoin on FTM network. Lambda can be minted via interest bearing tokens such as Spooky LP tokens, Beefy vault tokens, Curve gauge tokens and wrapped sSPA.

Majority of Lambda liquidity currently sits on FTM Curve with over $4.5M liquidity in Lambda-2Pool, with its price stabilizing at $1. Due to the over collateralization nature Lambda has never lost its peg.

See link below:


In the recent upgrade for Lambda 2.0, we have expanded ways to mint Lambda with USDC with an algorithm controlled backing with both USDC and SPA tokens.

We plan to allocate part of Spartacus Treasury which currently holds 13+M Dai to liquidity provision on Curve in support of Lambda, which we believe would bring value to both Curve and Spartacus communities.

Incentivizing the Lambda-2Pool would help improve help bring Spartacus Treasury to Curve ecosystem as well as unlock liquidity for SPA holders. We plan to lock a major portion of CRV tokens and reward SPA holders directly with CRV. We have no plans to direct sell CRV as we plan to be a long term partner in the Curve ecosystem.

We have implemented this feature on FTM network and plan to expand to ETH mainnet.


  1. Governance: Provide current information on the protocol’s governance structure. Provide links to any admin and/or multisig addresses, and describe the powers afforded to these addresses. If there are plans to change the governance system in the future, please explain.

Lambda minting and AMO are by the team multisig: GnosisSafeProxy | Address 0x251616944e771cD83d57aB7b073D291FE841A4DF | FtmScan

  1. Oracles: Does the protocol rely on external oracles? If so, provide details about the oracles and their implementation in the protocol.

Lambda oracles use Chainlink oracles, as well as custom price oracle monitoring a UniV2 type pool pricing.

  1. Audits: Provide links to audit reports and any relevant details about security practices.

The Spartacus Finance protocols audit report here: Spartacus - CertiK Security Leaderboard

  1. Centralization vectors: Is there any component of the protocol that has centralization vectors? E.g. if only 1 dev manages the project, that is a centralized vector. If price oracles need to be updated by a bot, that is a centralized vector. If liquidations are done by the protocol, that is also a centralization vector.

The Spartacus Treasury and Lambda AMO are managed by a team multisig. The liquidations of Lambda collaterals are decentralized and open for all.

  1. Market History: Has the asset observed severe volatility? In the case of stablecoins, has it depegged? In the case of an unpegged asset, have there been extreme price change events in the past? Provide specific information about the Curve pool: how long has it been active, TVL, historical volume?

The Lambda-2pool is located here: with over $4.5M liquidity.
Lambda has remained stable over the last 10 months even in a deteriorating market. The liquidity will only be improved with the incentive plan in place.

Would urge the Curve community to refrain from accepting the gauge. This dev is holding users hostage and has proven to be unreliable. The lambda stablecoin has no merrit and is not used, he also recently deployed new contracts that have not been audited. Finally there are signals that the core developer holds all keys to the multisig.

There have been several proposals on the SPA governance to change the cource of the project but the dev has ignored all of them, while according to the docs decisions are made trough governance votes.

(accedentally removed the post and reposted again)


gm curve governance

I wanted to highlight many of the issues with this proposal and request that as a SPA holder you do not accept it

  1. Lambda is an illegal fork of abracadabra

  2. Lambda has bugs. Users have reported issues of repayments not letting them withdraw full collateral a few times now.

  3. The answers above are outright lies and the dev seeks to mislead curve.

  • There has been no vote to allocate any more of the SPA treasury to lamba, he can’t just say he plans to do it when the DAO is strongly against it
  • This dev specifically does not care about governance (see point 4 below)
  • The dev says there is a multisig but the dev himself is multiple people on the same multisig so it is basically a hot wallet (see point 4 below)
  • He sent you an audit on Spa, the ohm fork that owns lambda, not an audit on Lambda which controls this stable
  1. Most importantly, the Lambda project was created, incubated, funded, and owned by the Spartacus DAO. The Spartacus DAO has these problems:
  • They refuse to answer questions about the multisig and the community believes the only dev on the project is lying about having other devs. We think he is the only signer and has just put himself on it multiple times.

  • They refuse to follow DAO votes, here you can see this vote passing without anyone voting no, and with 119k SPA voting yes. The current user owned supply of SPA is a little under 400k. 25% voter turnout surpasses any vote that has ever happened in SPA and is extremely high even for defi standards. Snapshot

  • Evidence has appeared where the dev himself claimed on the treasury multiple times, gave himself millions for engineering work (there are no eng except himself), and other suspicious activity. Here is an article which organizes and proves some of this: Spartacadabra and the mysterious money trail | by Pilezitin | Sep, 2022 | Medium


I am also recommending to do not accept this proposal. Spartacus DAO is not a dao, it is a one-man show with all the red flags explained above. Devs ignoring community feedbacks and questions, even banning members from discord with opinion against him without any notice. Dev acts potentialy can be considered even illegal.

Bad reputation, not transparent and ignorant team what you will have to deal with.


As one of holders of SPA I find existence of this proposal very surprising. Despite SpartacusDAO being advertised as DAO with governance by token holders this idea wasn’t voted by DAO (all previous actions were voted by governance here SpartacusDAO Snapshot. This one wasn’t even presented to DAO before posting it here.

Since nothing like that was presented and voted by DAO governance this claim is completely false. Maybe as “we” he meant himself… but he isn’t owner of SpartacusDAO treasury and can not manage it without DAO approval.

For all considering voting on this let me present you short recap of SpartacusDAO recent history.

For months before and after April redemption that dev mentioned in his post we were pleading in discord to use treasury for farming on Curve to bring value for holders. Back then dev completely ignored those ideas in favor of bootstrapping his own Solidly fork on FTM (didn’t get much traction, it doesn’t even have it’s own token yet Spex webiste) while token price trended down into multiples under backing/risk free value (terms defined by OlympusDAO). My guess is he wanted to buy for cheap and redeem like in April. Link to article with evidence was already posted above and for more savvy researchers you can find multiple wallets connected to Spartacus that bought SPA while dev was ghosting community and then redeemed for serious profits.

Since his 2-4 weeks of activity around April redemption and initial deployment of Spex contracts he hasn’t done anything meaningful for holders while blocking governance (only he can post proposals on SpartacusDAO Snapshot) and wasting time on random forks that no one uses (this Spartacabra v2 contract since it’s creation 2 weeks ago had only 11 mints for total volume of <250$. Source Ftmscan)

Due to this circumstances few weeks ago holders started organizing and created and advertised to community via discord and twitter new Snapshot space without absolute dev control (link). First proposal aimed to protect backing via lowering liquidity while token trades under backing and by implementing Inverse Bonds (another idea borrowed from OlympusDAO). 93k SPA voted for it with no votes against. Dev refused to do it and later banned creator of this proposal from discord together with bunch of people that dared to speak against team. After that there was 2nd proposal to completely dissolve SpartacusDAO and allow holders to redeem for their share of treasury with all not redeemed funds after 3 months to be clawed back into dev fund for further “development” of his forks. This proposal got 119k SPA votes for and again 0 against but was also ignored. For comparison last proposal created by Spartacus had 10k SPA votes for and 8.7k of it coming from single wallet Link

I believe this proposal is dev’s attempt to calm community and discourage legal actions against him while still keeping our funds hostage under his “multisig” so he can profit from it by farming and bootstraping his forks or worse…

P.S. Few words about Spartacabra…

  • There is bad debt in Spartacabra TOMB/FTM cauldron due to wrong price on oracle (AFAIK nothing has been done about it and dev didn’t even acknowledged it).
  • Website contains hardcoded and false APY values for cauldrons.
  • Protocol doesn’t accrue interests properly and users have to repay multiple times to unlock collateral (also I’ve seen few claims that interests were higher than advertised although I didn’t check that personally)

RFV hunters voted to shut down SPA so they can loot all the treasury. We are doing everything to bring values to SPA holders.

If you are an SPA holder, why would you not to have a gauge for the community?

  1. We are willing to reach a business deal with Abra team if they are willing to talk to us.
  2. Which collateral do you have issues removing? We are not aware of any issue related to collateral removal. DM me on twitter or discord your address and we will resolve this.
  3. Saying we do not care about governance is ignoring all the previous community decisions at Snapshot
    We are aware of the “votes” of RFV hunters who simply wanted to loot the treasury and these are votes we will not honor.
  4. Most of mentioned issues have been addressed in our discord. All funds allocations have been clearly announced and planned ahead. We have been 100% transparent with all our community since the founding of Spartacus.

RFV hunters want to bring a complete closure to SPA and this is something we can not allow to happen.

So you will only honor votes that come to the decision you want? That is not a DAO.

You took over half the funds you raised for Spartacadabra for your personal “expenses”. You have taken over $5MM off chain to binance. The chain doesn’t lie. You have stolen millions from your community.

You have banned everyone from discord who has questioned your decisions. Even as we speak, you are banning people.

1 Like

Your first half of the “argument” are simply wrongful accusations on the team.

SPEX does not have a token as it does need one yet. We need the market validation before having a token. The market conditions aren’t great for launching new products and it does not mean we should stop trying.

Again, your so called “votes” were from an organized “RFV hunter group” that went from protocol to protocol to shoot down projects and loot their treasury.

We do include an inverse bond plan once we have the Curve gauge turned on. Did you actually read our recent announcement, or you are simply coerced to bash the propose by your RFV leader?

On the Tomb/FTM cauldron, we will take a detailed look and come back with results. We are not aware of any bad debt situations but we will respond at a later time once we have a closer look.

Others are UI/UX issues we are going to fix/improve.

There is a 0% chance a dev who is one of the biggest RFV hunters for his own treasury can credibly blame “rfv hunters” for why he hasn’t done anything to deliver value to SPA token for months, or listened to the community at all (last proposal you ignored had no mention of redemption or anything of the sort).

1 Like

Frankly I consider this proposal a joke unless SPA removes the massive multisig and key-man-risk with the Dev, who insists on holding his own community and treasury hostage due to some battle with “RFV Hunters”

1 Like

There are several reasons why I don’t want to have a frax gauge.

I have been a holder for a while and decided to not redeem in the first redemption because I believed in your roadmap. The last couple of months have shown that there is no PMF and pumping more funds into incentivising a failed product makes no sense to me.

Secondly I have lost faith in your leadership, after numerous requests you still have not been able to verify who is on the multisig and the fact that you call anyone that critiques you or does not agree with your vision as an RFV person does not give me the confidence to continue in this way.

The third reason is that it makes no financial sense to incentivise Lambda, because there is no volume. Why would we use treasury funds to incentivise liquidity for a pair that has plenty of liquidity for the 4k volume it sees each day.

1 Like

What exactly is “wrongful accusation” here?

Isn’t it a fact that you are only dev in discord an no one seen or heard any other devs and all mulitisg owners were funded from same address?

Isn’t it a fact that you refused to implement any strategy designed to protect the backing despite community basically begging you for months?

Isn’t it a fact that wallets connected on chain to you redeemed over $4m in April?

Isn’t it a fact that you refused every suggestion and pretty much ghosted discord while you accumulated those tokens for redemption?

Isn’t it a fact that whole “dev fund” from Spartacabra LBE was taken off chain using multiple wallets and there is no information about how those funds are being spent?

I can go like that for ages…

For the spex token part. Rising for new token with PR and history like yours will be rough in any market conditions.

You found cute line of defense - “everyone who doesn’t agree with me is from rfv hunter group”.
First - group was organized after you started banning people on discord. We had to make our own place to discuss.
Second - no one wanted to “shoot down protocol”. Did you actually read our recent proposals, or you are simply here to block anything that doesn’t directly benefit your pocket? It proposed inverse bonds. Something good for holders, right? But you refused back then, maybe because you redeemed all your SPA in April and wanted to buy cheaper? That’s going to be hard with all those eyes watching spa these days.
Now you want to implement inverse bonds but only after you get curve gauge for Lambda? Why is that? Also from this gauge proposal we learn that you want to provide more liquidity to lambda. Something is definitely fishy here…


We responded earlier in multiple venues that the Spartacadabra funding is whats supporting all the dev work till today. There is no other source of funding for the team.

Because its true and wide known among the defi communities that the RFV hunting group led by some dog are hunting down every treasury protocol, attacking the team so they can redeem for instant RFV profits.

If you do not know this, either you are one of them, or you are not paying attention.

I replied to you on discord on the same question but since you posted here I am answering as well:

  1. the market conditions changed drastically.
  2. the multisig is on the team and i dont think its a relevant question at this point
  3. the market isn’t going to look perfect with rising rate from fed, but this is going to be one of the better strat for now. it does make financial sense for SPA treasury as its going to be a main beneficiary.

The valid question here is why implementing the inverse bond now? Because only by this there is a source of revenue to provide the funding for the buyback. Otherwise its mathematically distributing treasury to RFV hunters.

Your last statement shows there is a misunderstanding on how this works. The SPA treasury will be the largest beneficiary for the gauge due to the AMO design.

This proposal actually benefits SPA holders as it provides a rising floor.

If your plan is to go after the reputation of DCF GOD (a defi personality who has stood up for token holder rights and is respected) while you yourself being a double dealing, treasury hostage taking, copy paste dev, you really are deluded.

Stop holding the treasury hostage, fulfill the DAO’s wants as defined by governance proposals, and disclose who is on the multi-sig.


everything you are trying to say is referring to the RFV hunter group snapshot here: Snapshot

thats to dissolve the treasury so you and your dogs can instant 3x your money. somehow we can not support such things.

“source of revenue for the buyback”?..

your lambda thing has $4k of volume a day. It wont generate any revenue.