veCRV whitelist request for JPEG'd DAO

veCRV whitelist request for JPEG’d DAO:

JPEG’d DAO requests veCRV whitelisting for its multisig treasury 0x51C2cEF9efa48e08557A361B52DB34061c025a1B


JPEG’d DAO exists on the Curve ecosystem and and is one of the largest holders of CRV through vlCVX. JPEG’d is requesting veCRV whitelist to lock incoming CRV expected from compensation of the recent Vyper Exploit.


In support of the Curve platform, JPEG’d locking up CRV for 4 years with perpetual relocking for maximum voting power, will incentivize JPEG’d to continuously provide liquidity (TVL) hence fees for Curve, resulting in a win-win situation for both parties.


Whitelist veCRV lockup for the JPEG’d treasury 0x51C2cEF9efa48e08557A361B52DB34061c025a1B


Is JPEG’d launching a wrapped veCRV derivative?


JPEG’d locking veCRV means the CRV compensation will not hit the market, and will also incentivize additional TVL on the Curve platform.


Against the power of Curve Finance there can be no victory. We must join with him, anon. We must join forces with Curve.


I wholeheartedly support the veCRV whitelist request for JPEG’d DAO’s multisig treasury. Given that JPEG’d DAO voluntarily used its own funds to help remedy the recent Vyper Exploit in Curve’s contract, it’s evident that they are a responsible and valuable participant in the ecosystem. This action not only signifies JPEG’d DAO’s commitment but also positively impacts the stability and trust within the Curve platform. Whitelisting would further align JPEG’d DAO’s interests with Curve’s long-term success, benefiting all parties involved. This seems like a logical and beneficial next step for the community.

1 Like

Alchemix supports this proposal and will be making a similar request. Should be a win-win as it gives JPEG’d future flexibility / further curve alignment, while lessening/ spreading out the impact of the exploit and subsequent refund.

1 Like