TOKEMAK C.O.R.E.3 Voting

TOKEMAK have just posted about its next round of voting

Last year we voted to use our TOKE voting power to vote for TEMPLE in the C.O.R.E.2 vote and TEMPLE finished in 8th place.

We have since had a vote on how we would use our TOKE voting power in the C.O.R.E.3 vote (if it ever happened).

The vote ended with 1.1m yes votes (100%), but would not have passed quorum if quorum was enforced at the time.

A lot has changed since we voted on this so i think its only fair that we re-take the vote and only take action if it passes.

The TOKE voting starts on May the 2nd, so we will need to speed up our governance process.

I will put up the vote on the 30th of April on FRAX governance and end the vote on the 5th of May, assuming TOKE allow a week for voting that gives the team 3 days to take action on the outcome of the vote if it passes.

the vote will be the same as last time,

FOR = use the treasuries TOKE voting power to vote for TEMPLE in the TAKEMAK reactor core 3 vote

AGAINST = do nothing

Temple already starts with all the votes they had last round so will be able to get it without our help - we should just vote for whoever is closest aligned + most bribes on hidden hand marketplace

Right now TEMPLE has 100% of its treasury in FRAX ($140m), does any of the other protocols have that much invested in % terms or $ amounts?

If we should be voting for any of the other protocols then which ones and why?

As i understand it the votes TEMPLE got in the last round are used to give TEMPLE a boost at the start of this round, but its not 1-1 as it only counts votes from TOKE holders that have remained staked for the last year.

TEMPLE was short by millions of votes last time so even if we do vote for them its still not 100% they will get in the top 5.

All for Temple in terms of alignment but we already voted for them and made a FXS bribe last round on their behalf iirc - they are in the box seat to get the reactor this round because of what we already did. The best solution might be for them to OTC bribe us for Temple tokens below market rate - since we wouldn’t sell our Temple it just aligns us together with their upside potential

looking at the list the only protocols i see that have a relationship with FRAX are


holds FXS


I dont really see a reason to vote for a protocol that is not already working with us or using a FRAX product even if another protocol offers a big bribe. Voting for another protocol just to earn a one off bribe payment is short sighted but helping these other protocols build up more liquidity will help FRAX reach its long term goals.

1 Like

We should find positive sum uses for our valuable weight - we should give partners good deal for us to vote for them because we want them to succeed and have further interest in their upside to continue long term alignment. We are a great holder of partners tokens because it is incredibly unlikely we would ever need to dump tokens for operations

As you identified there are plenty of partners who want a gauge - if Temple think they have enough votes without us (very likely given how far ahead they will start) - then we should help one of our other partners who want a great deal for us to vote for them

Aligning via holding tokens is the best way to ensure long term alignment.

Us voting for Temple via an OTC bribe below market rate paid in Temple - when they know we won’t dump their token - is a win and help win strategy

TEMPLE need 3x the votes they got last time, so even if we use all our voting power just for them in the next round its still not going to get them over the line. Spreading out our votes in exchange for bribes will likely lead to us getting $100-200k while we miss out on the chance to increase the value of our assets (we hold about $1m in TEMPLE) and increase the liquidity of our partner thats holding a big chunk of the total FRAX supply on its books (about 15% of the FRAX thats in not in AMO’s)

Specifically they had 2.5mm and need another 4mm. As I said - all for it - but the weight has a value and we should find a way for it to be recognized by Temple with tokens OTC at discount to bribe market to align our protocols for the long term

the amount of votes that can be involved in this voting round will be higher then last time as the amount of TOKE in the wild has gone up via emissions. so the amount of votes needed to make top 5 will also go up.

they will only keep the first 2.5m votes if all the people that voted have kept there tokens locked since then, so i would suspect a % of them votes have already been lost.

Hey Pablo from Angle Protocol here! Just want to mention that Angle DAO holds sdFXS. We got FXS from Lobis and then immediately locked it in Stake DAO’s locker!

We have a gauge on Frax: FRAX/agEUR, and most of all FRAX is a collateral of the Angle Protocol that you can use to mint agEUR with no slippage at oracle value, we also offer yield products on top of Frax (an investment strategy on Aave that we will refine once FRAX becomes a collateral on Aave), and perpetual futures allowing people to long the $/short the € through FRAX.

We have offered a lot of ANGLE rewards to Frax stakeholders since FRAX has been a collateral and since there are gauges for these rewards we should keep doing so.

Having ANGLE on Tokemak would help increase liquidity for the ANGLE token, potentially improving the price action and hence revenue for FRAX holders through Angle.

Super happy to discuss getting a portion of your TOKE votes for the ANGLE reactor!


Personally i am invested in ANGLE and would personally benefit profit from them getting a TOKE reactor, but FRAX holds no ANGLE and has no direct investment in to ANGLE protocol. so if FRAX voted for ANGLE it would only see a slight increase in FRAX volume as a reward for its vote.

FRAX is the least used stablecoin on ANGLE, so the increased volume would be almost unnoticeable to FRAX and would likely add more value to the other stable coins used by ANGLE.

ANGLE only holds FXS because they where paid it from the LOBIS treasury when LOBIS imploded a few months ago. Before that ANGLE has shown no interest in holding FXS.

I personally proposed the idea of a partnership and token swap between ANGLE and FRAX last year and it was widely rejected by ANGLE members before it even got to the governance proposal stage.

I dont mean to put ANGLE down, and i would lover to see them get a reactor, but we should be voting to action the best option for FRAX, and right now the best option it to support the biggest FRAX adopters.

we can compare the two tho.


temple holds $140m of FRAX related asset.
temple pays $150k in bribes for FRAX gauge votes
temple only mints via FRAX
FRAX / TEMPLE gauge pair holds $32m in liquidity
FRAX holds $1m of TEMPLE in its treasury


angle holds <$10m FRAX related assets (mostly FRAX but also some sdFXS)
angle rewards around 2% of its gauge rewards for FRAX related LP’s (around $1,000 a week)
angle is minted via a number of stable coins and is mostly minted by USDC
angle offers perp trading via a FRAX pair, total TVL is $2m
the 2 agEUR / FRAX LP’s hold $19m in total.
FRAX holds no ANGLE

As ANGLE is a <$20m market cap protocol i cant see them having the funds needed to offer any meaningful bribe

frax proposals

well i guess its not going up for a vote then.

Yes fair enough it’s clear that TEMPLE has more involvement within the Frax ecosystem than what Angle has, and it’s normal that TEMPLE should receive more votes for the Core 3 event.

My point is that it’s worth considering putting some of these votes for Angle, and yes even though Angle is relatively small at this point, intrication with Frax community could increase, through the 4pool for instance.

What I’d suggest would be opening to a vote the allocation of TOKE rewards between different potential Core reactors, so that all does not go towards TEMPLE, and if there’s 1% of votes for ANGLE, then it still helps Angle!

On top of that, I can’t remember the exact circumstances under which Angle community rejected a token swap, but I am personally not opposed at all in an ANGLE/FXS token swap.

This is exactly the point we should do OTC bribes with our partners at giving them a better than market rate and put the governance tokens in our Treasury - it doesn’t have to be one or the other it can be whoever wants to participate from our partners

Temple and Angle both gud coins

it kinda dont work like that tho. to make the top 5 you need a lot of votes so the options are to give 1 protocol a good chance of getting in or give a number of protocols a very slim chance.

the token swap was rejected for a few reasons, the main reason was that some ANGLE investors felt that swapping ANGLE (at $0.50) for FXS (at $20) was a bad deal for ANGLE as FXS had pumped so much.
other ANGLE investors stated they would only be willing to swap 1% of ANGLES voting power for 1% of FXS voting power and the $ value difference was massive.

i really dont get the obsession with trying to get paid bribes for this vote, at most the bribes will be a few hundred thousand, but getting the best protocol a reactor could make us tens of millions.

if we had no horses in the race then i would 100% support trying to get bribes.

Ok I get your point on maximizing the chances for the protocol you support. On the other hand, it could also be a way to have two tokens you support passing the reactor event: like in expected gains, it could even be higher to split votes.

The way I see it there are two options: open to a vote which token should get the TOKE votes, or choose to keep splitting the votes

As for the ANGLE/FXS swap, we may have obviously been wrong at the time then!

last time we put our full support behind 1 protocol and offered bribes to get other voters involved, and it still failed to make the top 5 by a wide margin.

this time the top 5 will need even more votes due to TOKE emissions, TEMPE already has some votes from the last round of voting so will have the best chance to make the top 5, but even with our full support there is a good chance it wont make it as we have a much wider pool of protocols to compete with .

its highly unlikely to get 2 protocols in the top 5 if we spread our votes around as i can see other protocols being willing to spend $m’s just to get in.

the voters that voted for FOX, VISR, SNX, ILV and APW (34m votes total) will all be selling their votes to the highest bidder in this round, so unless a project is willing to put up a big bribe to get these votes then they wont make it.

if a protocol bribed us for all our votes they would still need to get other votes to make it.

imo, the best long term plan it for FRAX to put its full weight behind 1 protocol and once that protocol has a reactor FRAX puts its full weight behind the next protocol, until the frax related protocols are in, then we sell our votes for bribes

Ok makes sense then! Maybe there’ll be a Nash equilibrium in which there’s no competing projects bribing for the reactor, I personally hope that it’s going to go this way!