GIP-133: Should Gnosis DAO extend the Gnosis Pay Cashback budget (GIP-110) by 2,000 GNO?
Yes
No
0voters
GIP: 133
title: Should Gnosis DAO extend the Gnosis Pay Cashback budget (GIP-110) by 2,000 GNO?
author: Ondrej Pilny <ondrej.pilny@gnosis.io>
status: Draft
type: Funding
created: 2025-08-19
funding: 2000 GNO
Summary
This proposal seeks to allocate 2,000 GNO to extend the existing Gnosis Pay Cashback Program as defined in GIP-110. No changes suggested in GIP-131 or any other updates will be applied at this stage. All rules, tiers, limits, and conditions remain exactly as in GIP-110.
Rationale
The cashback program launched under GIP-110 has proven to be an effective user acquisition and engagement mechanism for Gnosis Pay. However, the allocated reward pool has been depleted.
While GIP-131 is under active discussion, reaching consensus on a new model will take more time. To ensure continuity for users and avoid interruption of the program, we propose a bridge allocation of 2,000 GNO. This temporary extension gives the DAO and community the time needed to refine and agree on a more sustainable long-term model.
Implementation
The additional 2,000 GNO will be added to the existing cashback pool.
All conditions (tiers, cashback percentages, spending caps, exclusions, distribution rules, etc.) will remain exactly the same as in GIP-110.
The program will continue until the new funds are exhausted or until a new GIP replaces it.
Next Steps
If passed, funds will be allocated immediately to avoid program disruption.
A separate proposal (building on GIP-131) will be brought forward once consensus on a revised model is reached.
Vote
YES: Allocate 2,000 GNO to extend Gnosis Pay Cashback Program under the rules of GIP-110.
NO: Do not extend the program; cashback ends when the current pool is depleted.
so it will give us about one month to make a decision how to proceed…agree with @mrtdlgc that all this should have been communicated much earlier…at least if the DAO is seen as an instance to participate in these kind of decisions. IMO we urgently need a statement from the core ppl @ernst@mkoeppelmann@StefanGeorge what really is the role the DAO participants are seen to fullfill. And the ltd driven projects need to get some advice which kind of topics need to be communicated here in time, even no imminent funding is needed.
The whole proposal reads like “We were too negligent, give us another $300k to fix our shit.” An alternative proposal would be to just fire whoever was responsible for the continuation of the program and use that extra money to go on with the cashback lol
Agree with the sentiment shared by others. There was mismanagement / miss-prioritization by the Gnosis Pay team and it would be great to get transparency on what went wrong and some accountability. One consequence could be for the Gnosis Pay team to pay 50% of this amount out of the allocated budget by applying the intended cost-cutting efforts.
Yeah, it’s not the best look - I would suppose most of us have been tracking depletion of the pool via Dune and have seen this coming from miles away. That being said, something needs to happen, and I’m not opposed IF this means a more sustainable proposal for actual continuation, and at that, one that is easily understandable and not over-engineered.
My take on the program overall: it was certainly a big success:
Played a big role in getting Gnosis Pay to grow
made more people GNO holder
brought additional attention and projects to the chain that would not have come without growing Gnosis Pay
10k GNO are also a “modest” expense compared e.g. to:
~20k GNO payer per year to validators
or the $1m worth of GNO (~7700) at current price to incentivize “Backed assets”
So IMO - it was a good program - but we can certainly try to optimize it - but until we find something where most agree its actually an improvement we should rather continue compared to loosing momentum by having an interruption. (specifically as other cards with agressive deals are basically annouced daily right now).
I don’t understand why gnosis pay, as one of the most successful products in gnosis chain, has not made any progress after one year. It has won customers by cash return and other marketing means, and has not kept people in gnosis chain.
You can also buy back gno to support this plan by integrating some management fees from defi projects into gnosis pay, but so far nothing has changed what it was like a year ago, and it still is.
I support this proposal as a temporary measure to extend the successful Gnosis Pay cashback program. It’s crucial that the team uses this window ( a few weeks to months ) to completely rework GIP-131 into a genuinely sustainable, long-term program. It makes no sense to have two short-term programs back-to-back. Doing so would only signal a lack of long-term planning by the Gnosis Pay team, which isn’t good for the project’s credibility.
This extension will probably only last for 1 to 1.5 months. In my opinion, GIP 131 suggests that the team does not yet have a clear idea of how to make cashback sustainable at this stage.
We will find ourselves in the same situation again quite soon.
This is not the first time I’ve seen complaints about the lack of clear and direct communication with the community, and it’s honestly frustrating to see good initiatives get overshadowed by something that should be easy to fix. As I’ve said before, this keeps happening and it really needs to be addressed once and for all. If Gnosis leadership is too busy defining the big picture, then someone close to them should be fully aware of all the moving parts and able to clearly communicate ongoing initiatives to the community, like a dedicated spokesperson. At this point, after all these years, I would have expected more maturity around this issue.
I’m in favor of the extension if it allows more time to prepare a stronger proposal.
HOWEVER, I believe the monthly limit per user should be lower—around €3,000 instead of €20,000. This way, the extension will last longer, and users won’t exploit it just to drain the cashback during the extended period.
…no further text but post must be at least 20 characters…