# Osmosis Grants Program v3 Renewal **URL:** https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/osmosis-grants-program-v3-renewal/1003 **Category:** Proposal Discussion **Tags:** passed **Created:** [December 17, 2023, 5:23pm UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/osmosis-grants-program-v3-renewal/1003 "2023-12-17T17:23:29Z") **Posts on this page:** 1 **Showing post:** 25
### Author: ![LeonoorsCryptoman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/forum.osmosis.zone/leonoorscryptoman/32/208_2.png) [@LeonoorsCryptoman](https://forum.osmosis.zone/u/LeonoorsCryptoman) #### Post date: [December 18, 2023, 8:34am UTC](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/osmosis-grants-program-v3-renewal/1003/25 "2023-12-18T08:34:15Z")
> [@RoboMcGobo](#): > > I appreciate the context on how you’re thinking about this though. As a counter-question, assuming you’d be a no on this proposal if the MM initiative isn’t separated out, are you a no because you disagree with the MM initiative? Or are you a no just because the proposals are combined (despite you agreeing with the mm initiative)? Mainly “no” on the combination, since it doesn’t allow the community to decide whether to: - only support the OGP for the current form of grants - or to also support the search for MM As you can see from the posts of @luisqa @Captain_Obvious @7m_giveaway @Chickenfox the community is cautious on the MM part. I would like to see a proper research first for the need of additional MM (if the data from @Captain_Obvious is correct that we already have market makers active) and what the scope is of such a tender. Because it is in fact a tender we will be putting out. --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.osmosis.zone/t/osmosis-grants-program-v3-renewal/1003)._