Add an Optional Feature on Whitelists for Borrower Gotchi Rental Limit

I have been running into some challenges running a large whitelist with many members for my guild where I want each member to only borrow a maximum of one Aavegotchi at a time.

Despite documenting rules about just borrowing one Aavegotchi, I am constantly having to remove people from the whitelist and Discord for abusing this and borrowing many Gotchis at once which delays/or leaves my other scholars without Gotchis.

I brought this up in #devs-chat and the solution that was proposed by Mori was allowing the whitelist owner to specify how many gotchis are allowed to be borrowed from their list at a time from any given address.

This would save me a lot of time and would probably be useful for many guilds with large whitelists.

Do you support the creation of this feature?

  • Yes
  • No

0 voters

4 Likes

Full support, lets get this in the meeting and on the path to glory ASAP.

I’d like to add that what Mori actually said, was this…

image

It’s ready or close to ready, on Dev side. If no one comes in here and hates it, please make the sigprop immediately. And please, have someone else proofread it, because there are no backs and you cant redo, due to the “copy paste protection”

Draft SigProp (let me know if any corrections are needed)

Gotchi Lending Whitelist Borrowing Concurrent Gotchi Rental Limit

Author + GotchiID: jarrod | aavegotchistats.com#9686, 20952

Link to the matching Discourse thread: Add an Optional Feature on Whitelists for Borrower Gotchi Rental Limit

Summary:

I have been running into some challenges running a large whitelist with many members on it for my guild where I want each member to only borrow a maximum of one Aavegotchi at a time.

Despite documenting rules about just borrowing one Aavegotchi, I am constantly having to remove people from the whitelist and Discord for abusing this and borrowing many Gotchis at once which delays/or leaves my other scholars without Gotchis.

The proposed solution is to update the whitelisting functionality for Gotchi Lending to allow a whitelist owner to specify how many Gotchis are allowed to be borrowed from their whitelist at the same time from any given address on that whitelist.

This was brought up in #devs-chat and from discussions held we received guidance that this would be feasible to implement and would require a vote from the DAO to implement.

Does the DAO support the introduction of this new feature?

Options:
Yes, implement this feature
No, don’t implement this feature

3 Likes

Is there a particular reason to restrict this feature to whitelists? I think it would be even better to have this option on the listing itself.

2 Likes

Love it. Hopefully we can get to a point where unused whitelists auto deletes after a period of inactivity to free up unused gotchi.

This option seems like a good idea, give whitelist controllers the choice.

In the screenshot of Mori’s post, though, he didn’t mention whitelists and I think it would need to be implemented at the whitelist level and it should be optional only. We definitely shouldn’t have addresses broadly limited to renting 1 gotchi each at a time, so need to confirm the fix is applicable to whitelists only.

I don’t see the point in enabling this option per listing as the main function of it would be to exclude whitelisted addresses from renting multiple gotchis (as per OP) which just means they’d need to redo all their batch functions on all their listings potentially which is redundant if the option is at the whitelist level (would be worth finding out if, technically, existing whitelists could be modified or everyone would have to make new whitelists?)

I don’t see much point in allowing individual gotchi lending agreements to specify a wallet can only have a certain number of other borrowed gotchis in it at the time of borrowing a new one. It’s also fairly easy to circumvent with multiple wallets.

I thought whitelists were on the blockchain and couldn’t be deleted? Correct me if I’m wrong.
I also don’t think it’s necessary, especially for very casual players who should have no reason to expect their whitelist to have disappeared randomly when they next log in.
I also don’t see how it would free up unused gotchis? Please explain if I’m missing something.

1 Like

I cannot comprehend what you are trying to achieve here. What does the existence of a whitelist have to do with a gotchi being available? If the person wanted it on a list, and then forgot to take it off, or are AFK, why do you think canceling their rental and deleting the list, would change anything?

People are complaining about Gotchis being snatched away by bots. Sure, they could make multiple wallets, but still, what would it hurt to put the option on the listing instead of the whitelist? The people who want to use it for their whitelists would still get the same functionality out of it. And people who would like to use it for their publicly rented Gotchis would be able to as well.

1 Like

I was just spit balling because i did not know if it was possible or not. If the whitelist is not being used, i was under the impression neither were the gotchi so why should there be an unused whitelist?

I am saying why should unused/inactive whitelist that from my understanding hold unused gotchi still be valid? Granted the whitelists are like herpes but if they are not being utilized imo there should be a way to invalidate them. And why would you cancel an active whitelist?

I don’t understand what a whitelist did to hurt you. It’s just there… don’t type the number in and it can’t do anything…

Whitelists don’t hold gotchis. They hold addresses of renters that are allowed to rent.

When you list the gotchi with a whitelist, it just means that it checks if you are on that list, before allowing that transaction.

If they don’t care that noone is renting their gotchi, it’s vey much none of our business, and canceling their rental offer isn’t going to do anything but remove it from your view.

LOL yes when i was younger i got bullied by a whitelist :sweat_smile: but to me it seems like i have touched a nerve with you on this topic. Noone said anything about cancelling a rental offers that are active so i am unsure where you got that information. Ok so if i put lets say 50 gotchi in a whitelist. So now those 50 gotchi can only be rented by that whitelist and it could be that in some instances players that agreed to have their gotchi added to the whitelist are unaware that they are not being used. Understandably if they were more actively engaged, they would realize this but some owners have not been active since the Playdrop.

But if they are not active, what does it matter if they are on a whitelist? No-one will rent it, they wont relist if you cancel them… there is nothing to be done with them? The listing is a contract, we can’t just cancel people out of their contracts.

1 Like

Tell the truth are you in this situation? You are taking this and really running with it because i do not see this as any different than placing a time limit retroactive like what was done with the default max renting time previously done with rental listings :man_shrugging:. What is wrong with even suggesting that whitelists as well as any rental listing have a default “good until X” timeframe? If players are actively using the whitelist again what is the drawback?..But we are way off the intended topic so sorry @jarrod :sweat_smile:

I’m just trying to understand why this is something to care about.
It doesn’t compute. This is totally something Jarrod could just add to his rental tools… no need to add some automatic gas burning thing to do it. You could just rig up a process that you run when you feel like it, and it does the query, and then submits the correct command to the contract to edit your list.

edit: wait, are you talking about on this screen? Before you make the rental? I’m clearly not understanding what mechanic you are going for.

image

110% for something like this as WL abuse is definitely something I’m dealing with in my guild. Whitelists are not free-for-alls and the more features available to the owner the better when it comes to locking down control of a WL, especially in the use-case for guilds. A feature like Jarrod mentioned would be extremely beneficial in this case.

How do we go about coordinating the build-out of the tool? I know at VGG we have a good dev team that could contribute to building out tools around this subject, we also have 8300+ unique user data points to work with ever since we introduced a more permissionless system to WL – which is now paused as we consider alternative designs.

+1 for getting something like this going. It should help smooth out onboarding issues.

2 Likes

We can submit a grant to the DTF to pay someone or someones, to make a proper tool for all of us to use…

We just need to identify what are all the features we want(especially ones that PC will probably do last), who will do it, how much its worth it to them in GHST to make it and support it(enable features as PC adds smart contract calls) through at least round 1.

As soon as PC gives us access to new contract features, we should be opening those wide up for the whole community, so it’s not just few people getting to use the features first.

Here is my proposed implementation.

5 Likes

Thanks for sharing mate.