AIP-456: Airdrop for Long-Term Holders and Stakers

Some initial thoughts:

  1. First, we could set categories for dApps the DAO is looking to have created (e.g. gaming, SocialFi, etc). This may help drive some structure to the effort and ensure we are building out the type of ecosystem we all want to see (conversely, we could also just leave it wide open and let the market decide).

  2. In terms of KPIs, I think it needs to be a combination of TVL on ApeChain as well as something akin to Daily Active Users. For all the reasons we seek to have more decentralization in voting, I wouldn’t want a few larger wallets to simply be able to lock up their $APE and win the prize. If the goal here is adoption and scale, we need to have more than one way of measuring it IMO.

  3. Separate from the competition itself, I think it would behoove the DAO to also have an efficient funding mechanism to help these teams start building. Whether a streamlined AIP process (where there is a standard template specific for this initiative) or an AIP that carves out funding for small grants related to ApeChain building (similar to Thank Apes) it would help us scale more quickly.

I’ll continue to give this some thought. Thanks for the challenge here.

2 Likes

I agree with the fund option that sounds amazing but do I think the greater $APE community would vote yes on a fund I’m starting… I don’t think so. But tbh I don’t know the outcome of that. This was a greater focus on engagement and giving the DAO the power it needs to maximize its community. Showing we aren’t a ruling party controlled by Moca and Horizen. I think it would be interesting to see what people what to do with the DAO.

I also think a refocusing of accumulation of a coin that is rewarding its holders is important. Now the ways to get there is disputed.

You don’t believe the community has a right to decide if they want airdrops or rewards to long term delegations holders and teams.

I admittedly disagree if the community and DAO wants it. Then that’s the whole point of governance.

Why is it the worst?

Please give an example on how letting a community decide what they want to do is the worst AIP idea you’ve seen

Ok Matt I appreciate you gl

We are already funding such an initiative that does exactly that, and 175,000,000 apecoin was committed from the DAO’s treasury - it is called STAKING. Although maybe removing the added percentage for pairing BAYC&MAYC&BAKC and thereby strengthening rewards received by apecoin only stakers is the way to go.

This AIP won’t be approved by the foundation as it stands so I agree with Matt - maybe energy is being wasted here?

One other glaring issue here for me is if this was approved and passed it would mean ‘the rich get richer’. (They will ofc hodl their “airdrop” and strengthen their voting powers - another concern.)

We are a grants DAO and our objective is to fund what’s next for the whole of web3, not to simply put millions into the pockets of top holders.

Thanks.

1 Like

Agree with most of the comments here, the focus really needs to be using what is in the treasury to advance the Value of Apecoin DAO, usage of $APE as a sink to start driving price in the right direction.
Also the notion of increasing TVL on Ape Chain, once live is a valid one.

Furious hit the nail on the head with his comments around ‘rich get richer’ and strengthening the voting powers of existing holders that may not necessarily be active DAO contributors.

3 Likes

Hi @Xavierfreeway,

The community feedback period for your proposal would be ending in less than 24 hours.

  • If you’re content with the feedback received, your next steps are to finalize your proposal using the AIP Draft Template.

  • A moderator will reach out to the author to finalize the AIP Draft. Upon receipt of the final Draft, we will review and provide instructions on the next steps.

  • Are you ready to proceed to the next phase or do you wish to extend community discussion for another 7 days?

We look forward to hearing from you.

-@Facilitators

Next phase me please

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 14 hours. New replies are no longer allowed.

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

The AIP Draft submitted is currently incomplete and feedback has been provided to the author.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Thank you,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@Xavierfreeway has completed editing their AIP Idea to be their AIP Draft.

This proposal has been assigned the AIP ID Number 456.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

1 Like

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

Our team has reviewed and discussed @Xavierfreeway’s AIP Draft and have sent a list of initial questions. We await answers.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@Xavierfreeway has responded to our questions and they are in our review once again.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@Xavierfreeway has responded to our questions and has provided consent to share them in this forum for the community.

Click to expand Q&A with @Xavierfreeway

1. Please revise your Team Members section, as specified by the AIP Draft Template and AIP-121, it will be compulsory to provide a description of team members (a brief “CV”, previous experiences in Web2 &/or Web3). As your proposal would enlist “smart contract developers,” “community managers” and “data analysts,” please include their individual credentials here.

I will revise the Team Members section to include detailed descriptions of each team member’s credentials and previous experiences in both Web2 and Web3. This will cover the smart contract developers, community managers, and data analysts.

2. Would you and/or the aforementioned team members receive any compensation from this proposal?

Yes, the team members mentioned in the proposal, including myself, would receive compensation for their contributions.

3. Your Steps to Implement #1 details include “Define the eligibility criteria for long-term holders and stakers.” Who would be responsible for determining these criteria?

The responsibility for determining the eligibility criteria for long-term holders and stakers will lie with the smart contract developers and data analysts, in consultation with the community managers

4. Your Steps to Implement #3 details include “Present the plan to the community, incorporating feedback to ensure transparency and address any concerns.”

a.) What communication channels or platforms would be used to convey this information to the community?

The information will be conveyed to the community through our Discord server, official forums, and social media channels like Twitter.

b.) If not the same as above, what platform(s) would the community be using to provide their feedback?

The community will provide their feedback primarily through the same platforms: Discord, official forums, and social media channels.

c.) This step also mentions “Community managers” in the personnel line. Please identify these managers and how they have been (or would be) selected.

The community managers will be selected based on their experience and contributions to the DAO. They will be identified in the revised Team Members section.

5. Your Steps to Implement #5 details include “Evaluate the effectiveness of the airdrop, gathering community feedback and making adjustments for future initiatives.” What future initiatives based on this proposal are currently being considered?

Future initiatives based on this proposal include potential subsequent airdrops, staking rewards programs, and other community engagement activities. These will be detailed further based on the initial airdrop’s effectiveness and feedback.

6. Your Overall Cost section states “All development and operational costs are covered by existing funds.”

a.) Which “existing funds” are you referring to here?

The “existing funds” refer to the remaining budget allocated for DAO operations and development.

b.) If these funds are to be deducted from the 50% Ecosystem Fund airdrop allocation, please revise your Overall Cost section to include and detail these expenses.

If funds are to be deducted from the 50% Ecosystem Fund airdrop allocation, I will revise the Overall Cost section to detail these expenses accordingly.

7. Would there be any planned third-party audits of this airdrop smart contract outside of your team? Please provide details.

Yes, we plan to engage a third-party audit firm to review the airdrop smart contract. The details will be provided once the auditor is selected.

8. You’ve defined “Airdrop” as “A distribution of a cryptocurrency token or coin to numerous wallet addresses.” As many wallets long-term holding ApeCoin may be “dead” or inactive wallets, have you instead considered a “reverse airdrop” that would have holders initiate a claim so as to ensure those claiming are in fact active holders (as well as place the burden of gas fees on the claimant)?

We have considered the issue of inactive wallets and are open to the idea of a “reverse airdrop” where holders initiate a claim. This approach will be discussed further with the community to ensure consensus.

9. Given the large size of the requested grant, would you be open to receiving the grant in tranches?

Yes, we are open to receiving the grant in tranches to ensure transparency and accountability.

10. Would the funds be received in a multi-sig wallet?

Yes, the funds will be received in a multi-sig wallet.

a.) If so, how are multi-sig signers being elected?

Multi-sig signers will be elected from among the most active and trusted members of the community.

b.) Is there a legal entity representing the multi-sig that would be ready and capable of obtaining legal title to the grant amount?

There will be a legal entity representing the multi-sig, ready and capable of obtaining legal title to the grant amount.

11. Do you provide consent to apply updates to the relevant areas of your proposal based on your responses to the questions above?

Yes, I consent to applying updates to the relevant areas of the proposal based on the responses to these questions.

12. Do you provide consent to share these questions and answers with the community in this forum?

Yes, I consent to sharing these questions and answers with the community in this forum.

Edits have been made to this Topic, by the author, by the author’s request, or with the author’s consent. You can click the Pencil icon at the top of the post to see these edits.

A DAR package is being worked on and upon completion this AIP will move into Administrative Review. Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

We have sent a list of follow up questions to the author.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

I couldn’t find you on X

I think 50% is too much. Maybe 5% is more reasonable.

It should be a claim not just passively given.

The claim should be locked and then streamed so can’t just be dumped.

Lock 6 months

Streamed 12 months.

I also agree with some authors that the APE only rewards should be increased or the difference with BAKC, MAYC APY made less.

Another alternative if you lock you staking for 1 month, 3,6, 12 months etc you get a higher reward vs just locking which can be unlocked anytime. If you lock 3 months and break the lock, you forfeit the staking rewards of that whole 3 month period.