ApeChain: Request for Proposals

In alignment with the ApeChain RFP process, the APE Foundation is putting forth a proposal which will run concurrently with the Snapshot vote selection of a proponent.

During a 6-day voting period, the ApeCoin community will vote to decide whether to approve the continuation of voting of ApeChain: Selection of proponent to build ApeChain.

ApeChain: Build an ApeChain - Vote For or Against proposal

Link to the full proposal: ApeChain: Build an ApeChain - Vote For or Against


Thank you so much for this! Really appreciate it.


Thanks LiveFast for the contribution!!


Now everyone go and vote, this is an important part of the Governance process.


I have voted!


Absolutely! I’m proud of the call the foundation took to reconsider the decision and engage with the community for a vote on ApeChain. It demonstrates a commitment to respecting the structure, community, and the overall process. Each step we take is a learning opportunity, and I’m excited about our progress we doing together.

-Mr. Hype :fire:


Wow am i getting something wrong or is @SandeepNailwal and Polygon showing complete double standards in this vote to select a chain?

Let’s look at what appear to be the facts;

  1. Polygon loses the snapshot temperature check for their kit to be used by ApeChain


  1. Sandeep removes the votes of Machi Big Brother and Horizen Labs votes because he believes they were self-interested

  1. Incredibly, his CEO then goes on to buy APE tokens and vote for themselves !

Am i getting something wrong here?


No you’re not, but there’s more context.

On Monday Marc (Polygon) said on twitter spaces that in light of none of the others agreeing not to vote (in particular Machi & horizon), he/they have now taken the decision to use their 10 million votes to counter others.

(Maybe the 6 million are part of the 10 - not sure I’d have to look, but tl;dr is Marc confirmed they will use their apecoin to vote on apechain.)


Thanks that does add some color to the decision

ArbitrumDAO has an interesting discussion going on about self voting that we can learn from - tldr is token holders should vote however they feel like and we honor the results

Don’t create stupid stipulations that aren’t enforceable onchain


If you see from voting, this wallet voted for Polygon. I could be wrong, but I think Marc made a statement at the end of last year, stating 6m ApeCoin.

Polygon - 0xb4E8212005e9C9989F0aD907C5b9eB84d1cC352A
6,021,048.2 APE

Horizen - 0x72dce6fA22ebA1F0abCb28629A3918c6C88269Da


The one you linked at 6.7m is horizen, but I did check back on twitter and Marc does say $10m in APE purchased not 10m apecoin - thanks for clarification on that.

I had a quick look and this is the polygon one imo with 6m $ape approx as ties in with mid December purchase.



I actually put both Horizen and Polygon eth addresses in my post in different formats. I have edited it to be more clear now. Thanks.


Some great points here and a long read but worth it.


Interesting seeing this develop and we will just have to make the most of whatever is decided.

Big wallets are involved and outnumber the majority.

:eyes: :popcorn:


The votes are IN… ApeChain it is.

LFG! We ball. But who will emerge victorious in the end… :eyes:


Going to be a close one I think! :eyes: :popcorn:

Unless Mocaverse votes for “Horizen; Arbitrum” :white_check_mark:

1 Like

Without a doubt, it is one of the most discussed AIP’s.
This is very important, it means that each member here expresses their opinion and possible solutions, I’m just following the arguments, to learn more from everyone.
Lots of smart members.

1 Like

Many portfolios with high voting power are focused on this AIP.

1 Like

Moca’s all in on Polygon.

So yeah, down to the wire.

Still astonished that we’ve determined it’s okay to have a sitting Special Council member “influence” the vote of what would be a seemingly important decision for the DAO, rather than recuse themselves. Supreme Court Issues - SMH



Regarding Influence (e.g have an effect on something) @capetaintrippy already stated that @Airvey was not part of the RFP discussions/preparations.

Given that anyone can buy APE on a DEX and then vote according to 1 APE = 1 Vote, so people can show their alignment based on their voting choices. I don’t think you are saying certain people shouldn’t vote on any specific AIP, as this would create all kinds of Governance problems. Personally (though my APE amount is not massive) I have decided, while I am a Governance Steward that I will delegate it to the Bull Delegation that is being setup (I will vote in that snapshot, though I am only a small percentage of all the NFTs in those collections).



Appreciate your thoughts.

Actually, I am and have been suggesting that anyone that runs and serves on the Special Council should be separated from voting or having influence on AIPs. Their role and responsibilities should be as follows:

Cheers - SSP