Initial Bonus/Multiplier Proposal (for any potential token airdrop)

:white_check_mark: In case of any token airdrop(s), the following bonus multipliers should be applied to the FINAL number that is assigned to each recipient wallet REGARDLESS of tokenomics or other factors:

:one: 0.000001375% bonus tokens per each block produced since the first transaction of the address (wallet age: 0.089% extra per day)
:two: x% bonus tokens where x is the highest percentage of tips they have ever given (percentage is fairer than flat number)
:three: 0.2% bonus tokens per each tip given stacked additively up to a maximum of 20% or 100 times tipped
:four: 20% bonus tokens if the wallet holds any domain name or ID on any supported chain (e.g. ENS, BrightID, etc.)
:five: 66% of tokens initially vested of which half unlocks linearly in 2 months and the remaining linearly in 4 months
:six: The OPTION to earn an additional 20% bonus tokens by donating 0.01 ETH to DAO treasury (one-time per wallet only, available immediately and excluded from vesting period)

97 Likes

Love the idea. Thank you.

A few notes:

  • I dislike option 6, as it reminds me of the “scammy” airdrops such as WTF etc. It might create a rather predatory image of the GURU community, IMO.
  • I think there should be a multiplier for those who vote in the snapshot votes, to reward active voting.
  • I think there should be a clearer rationale for vesting if we decide on that. Currently, I do not see the benefits. And I do see a more negative side in the form of high gas costs, which might scare away DAO users.
36 Likes

Don’t see why we need to complicate things. All the good airdrops have been fairdrops with one or two requirements from the early users.

Everyone who donated and did 5 or so trades on dex.guru should be included and given a fair share.

This just seems like a list of things you qualify for.

40 Likes

Don’t see why we need to complicate things. All the good airdrops have been fairdrops with one or two requirements from the early users.

Everyone who donated and did 5 or so trades on dex.guru should be included and given a fair share.

This just seems like a list of things you qualify for. ]

These are not requirements, rather bonuses. I have no comments on eligibility or requirements at the moment. These multipliers apply the same to ALL eligible addresses regardless of requirements or tokenomics.

15 Likes

Like slow vesting, might argue that even slower schedule would be beneficial for the project, but this are best being an usability-dependent matter in my opinion, so “for any potential airdrop” goes too far.

Factor number 1 is about the first dex.guru transaction of the address, right?

I can’t understand the point of number 4. Can you explain why should that matter for the project? Are we getting a joint marketing campaign with them?

9 Likes

@Wkwktktk

Like slow vesting, might argue that even slower schedule would be beneficial for the project, but this are best being an usability-dependent matter in my opinion, so “for any potential airdrop” goes too far.

Factor number 1 is about the first dex.guru transaction of the address, right?

I can’t understand the point of number 4. Can you explain why should that matter for the project? Are we getting a joint marketing campaign with them?

For #1, I’d propose the first transaction on the wallet itself on the chain(s) they interacted with dex guru. The reason being I don’t think we should reward people just for being early or penalize them for being late; the purpose of this suggestion is to give more weight to legitimate wallets as opposed to bots and farmers (because there were many bot wallets created after the ENS airdrop).

As for #4, again real people and legitimate EOAs are vastly more likely to own a domain when compared to bot accounts and farmers. In addition, I’d argue those with domains are more likely to be blockchain enthusiasts and powerusers and thus more beneficial to the ecosystem as a whole when compared to EOAs without domains. Third, domains could be considered as a sort of unique identity because they are nonfungible.

Happy to answer any more questions that you might have.

8 Likes

I like the idea of multipliers but it should only apply to people who hold GURU tokens. There should be a minimum number of token to hold to benefit from it. I own UDs and ENS, but not sure it’s really inclusive. For sure if we go that direction, let’s include Unstoppable Domains as well though. Vesting is for VCs in my opinion, other incentives to hold should be in place, like what I said: holding a number of tokens to benefit from bonus/multipliers.

2 Likes

Good points and suggestions but I didn’t like point 5. there should be maximum vesting of 3 months and not 6 months. :smiley:

3 Likes

I like all ideas except from point 6 so far. Perhaps someone else opinion may change this. Point 6 reminds me of those airdrops where people donate money in hope for a future airdrop and it never happens because of devs wanting to take peoples money and run.

1 Like

I’m very concerned about the ENS and DYDX airdrops. The simpler the distribution method, the better for the benefit to the user or to decentralize ownership.

10 Likes

I think tokens must distributed between who minted NFT

14 Likes

I support your proposal very much, especially the hope that it will be airdropped to real users instead of the wool party

1 Like

I particularly agree with the fourth point, especially brightid, which can isolate many wool users. At that time, some of them would still be mixed in, but that was only a few

Option 4? I disagree as it leaves a lot of active users of Dexguru in the dark. I don’t see how having a domian name relates to using DEXGURU

3 Likes

Option 4? I disagree as it leaves a lot of active users of Dexguru in the dark. I don’t see how having a domian name relates to using DEXGURU

Bots and farmers are less likely to have domains; having a domain gives more legitimacy to an EOA because it makes it more likely to be human-owned. (farmers don’t buy domains for bots hoping it gives them more airdrops)

3 Likes

I think tokens must distributed between who minted NFT.

12 Likes

Something like this:
Eligible users are those who claim NFT and also verify their BrightID

No, definitely not as a requirement but rather an extra bonus for those who have verified BrightID or ENS or UD or other identity tokens on any chain.

2 Likes

The 4th point is made for what? It sounds like you just want to tighten the criteria to suit you. If you can justify that this is necessary, we can discuss it. But for now, I strongly oppose point 4. Point 6 is also strange, I do not quite understand what it is for.

The problem is that there are people who have multiple accounts, the administration has clearly said that 1 nft = 1 vote. That is, you take away some of the power of those votes if you make them go through identification. It seems to me that this is not really fair, since they originally had more votes, you just take them away if you don’t give tokens to the person’s other accounts.

The 4th point is made for what? It sounds like you just want to tighten the criteria to suit you. If you can justify that this is necessary, we can discuss it. But for now, I strongly oppose point 4. Point 6 is also strange, I do not quite understand what it is for.

As I’ve explained above, EOAs that have a nonfungible identity on chain are vastly more likely to be controlled by real human beings rather than airdrop farmers or bots. There are airdrop farmers with many wallets but they do not own any on-chain identity. Again, this is NOT a filter, only a bonus for those whose identity is verified.

1 Like