This probably will be too complex in terms of KYC, whitelisting, and the whole logistics for such token sale. TLDR; - too many legal risks and early community participants getting airdrop anyway.
60% of total supply.
So you want to sell 15% tokens at LBP for example for 15%/ $1,5m and airdrop 20%/ $2m worth of tokens. Where $500k of missing liquidity will come from? What’s will left in DAO treasury after? Why are we even doing LBP if airdrop will wipe out DAO treasury immediately?
Again, before asking for a larger airdrop allocation, think about who will be your exit liquidity.
I think 1-5% is not enough for early early community participants who support the GURU platform and participate in DAO. We aim to allocate more to early users (e.g. 5-10%).
First off I have to thank @Nick and the dev team for their great job on this draft proposal,
I’m happy that I see ve Token Model and premium subscription selling plans as I also proposed the on another draft here.
About the Airdrop this reply got my attention and felt the most rational to me,
Not to be fund of myself since I was the proposer but honestly so far it seems like we did a fairly good job with the airdrop proposal and from the comments it feels like most of the community thought of it as the fairest airdrop proposal they have ever seen, so we should be careful not to ruin this good community vibes. At this point we can’t make any mistakes.
My suggestion is 12% for Airdrop and 12% for lbp.
For the airdrop 8% would be in Guru token and another 4% would be veGuru locked for 2 years.
We gathered a great community here, we won’t want to lose them after the airdrop, by giving them a fair percentage of veGuru tokens we make sure they stay with us for a while and receive a greater amount of tokens at the end for their contributions.
Also regarding the exit liquidity there are several dashboards of previous airdrops we can use here:
In most of the airdrops there are notable numbers of wallets who prefer to hold their airdrop for a while than selling it, here we are also giving them voting powers and incentives for locked staking, So there will be more holders than expected, even if we assume this doesn’t happen and everyone sells the tokens immediately, As you can see on the above dashboards at worst case scenario 20% of the eligible wallets didn’t claim their airdrop even months after it, we can highly assume this happens here too and this puts the real liquidity exit that we should be worried about at a 6%, LBP is proposed to set at 12%, this is 2x the allocation of airdrop tokens which will most likely satisfy our exit liquidity concerns and more importantly provides us enough funs to kick start our DAO goals.
At least 15% for airdrop, 5% is nothing, lets see whats going to happen, what nick think, but hope he will do what is good for the project and community
I think 10 percent allocated for early participants and 20 percent for LBP seems okay… LBP should be more than Airdrop not same as Airdrop but 5% seems little
For the airdrop 8% would be in Guru token and another 4% would be veGuru locked for 2 years.
That idea seems reasonable but I think it promotes to dump the token. If I know that I will get an airdrop which 1/3 of allocation is locked and gives me permission to join governance/benefit from incentives, then I would be tempted to dump the rest 2/3 of the token.
Maybe we can give 4% of $pGuru (with different incentives like in here [DRAFT PROPOSAL] Adoption of ve Token model - #4 by fukuyamasato1 ) instead of veGURU and we should promote people to stake their 8% allocation to veGURU. This may create fomo and decrease dump.
GURU Token total supply looks great and vesting time is good too.
Is there any plan to provide the GURU token on other blockchains like Polygon and BSC as Dexguru supports these blockchains, with some use case for users?
With LBP our main goal is to fill DAO treasury, not just provide exit liquidity for airdrop hunters.
If DAO wants to sell 12% of the token on LBP and airdrop the same 12% (even with vesting), I doubt we will see great results with LBP. Just think about who will even buy tokens on LBP if there’s an airdrop of the same size happening. LBP buyers aren’t stupid so I doubt we can pull it off.
And again - our goal is to fill DAO treasury and bootstrap token liquidity, so DAO can have something to spend on all the wonderful things our community could propose.
Liquidity is DAO-owned after all and if DAO dumps it immediately on the airdrop exit, it would be a zero-sum game for GuruDAO.
I can’t argue with this honestly, use of pGuru in the proposed model could work better, but from the suggestions I got from dev team, It seems like they’re not comfortable with implementing this.
Aside from that, we have gathered some seriously active users with brilliant ideas here in the preDAO stage, money can be tempting I know, but by giving out veGuru we encourage them to stay and have a say in the DAO, as everyone knows ve Token Model is based on durations of holdings, the more you hold, the more voting power you get, Now if everyone is granted about the same amount of veGuru locked tokens as we discussed in airdrop proposal, Then one would consider staking more tokens to have more rights in the voting as every wallet who was eligible for airdrop has almost equal power as the others, Those huge whales who bought tokens in LBP would also consider staking their tokens if they want to have a real saying in proposals, these are all gifted to us with the extraordinary ve Token Model. Overall this brings us more favors than downsides.
about the LBP allocation, I again insist on a 12% sell. As said in my original comment, at worst we can expect a 6% circulating supply from airdrops, this is already 50% of the LBP allocation. Then again it’s safe to assume that with all the great incentives for staking, 25% of the airdrops will go straight into the staking pools, this puts airdrop circulating supply at a 4.5% compared to the 12% LBP allocation.
All of these will be informed to potential buyers in case they are worried about a “12%” airdrop allocation.
We can raise enough money to for our treasury to kick start our goals, and also provide those hunters the exit liquidity they need, dedicating a larger portion of tokenomics to LBP is providing whales with cheap tokens.
i dont agree with this proposal because dont give fair percent to community atall
this is against fairness
fair percent is 10 percent for community
nick you must listen to dao not impose your ideas to dao
we dont agree with this proposal
i declin this unfair proposal
