Sure, we could have done that. PC and the DAO would make much less GHST, and there would be more Gotchis to compete in Rarity Farming, which would dilute H1 holders’ rewards. We did consider the option, but ultimately decided it made more sense to continue growing the RF pool to ensure that H2 Gotchis wouldn’t be taking away H1 gotchis’ rewards.
No decision exists in a vacuum, and I think there are justifiable cases for both ways.
You are of course forgetting that we did do a significant airdrop of FAKE Gotchis cards to Gotchi holders.
From what I remember, there was considerable pushback from many in the DAO on this decision, but we did it anyways. I don’t see anyone celebrating PC because we created an entirely new asset class and airdropped it to Gotchi holders. Instead, people were telling us that FAKE Gotchis was a waste of time and a deviation from the roadmap.
The fact is that creating an entirely new asset class and airdropping it to holders is extremely difficult to do. The survivorship bias is strongly in effect here. You give Yuga Labs a halo because they made it to the top with this method. But hundreds of other NFT projects did this and it didn’t end well.
I suggest reading “Fooled by Randomness” by Taleb for a thorough discussion of the huge role luck plays in success, and how survivorship bias skews our perception of reality.
The point is that there are no core assets. It is an asset that can sustain growth. I hope to pass the proposal to never issue H3. Existing gotchis is all there is to it, and then there will be a little burn. In this way, there are core assets.
If it can be issued forever, there will be a knife hanging over the head. Holders are always afraid of being diluted, resulting in asset depreciation.
So to say that PC has never done airdrops to Gotchi holders is definitely false. Did our airdrops generate massive amounts of hype? No. Because Aavegotchi didn’t have the same amount of hype that Bored Apes did going into them. But we have definitely rewarded Gotchi holders.
This is not necessarily true. It would have been possible to keep the same number of portals and raffle fewer of them. Again, I am suggesting we find more clever ways to reward long term holders. Even airdropping an LE golden statue which is vanity and non-competitive would have been warmly received.
This is a separate point. After falling behind over one year on a roadmap, it’s understandable your users are upset about anything being released apart from the promise.
That being said, I do believe the airdrop was warmly received and appreciated.
I only used them as an example. Have a look at Opensea’s top volume by project. What do they all have in common? They’re laser focused on delivering value to their holders.
I’ve also seen a ton of projects who only build “for the art” and for the vibes which have failed.
At the end of the day, it isn’t about airdropping free stuff. It’s about focusing on delivering value to the holders. The present model does nothing to attract loyal holders. Call it what you will, but we are in crypto. People don’t like to buy things that drop 80% in value and are illiquid.
I don’t disagree with you there fren. My main disagreement is that the proposed 25/25/25/25 split is actually less fair than our proposed 20/40/40 split. If people are selling their assets 4 days away from a RF snapshot, I don’t see how specifically earmarking 25% of the DAI for rewards potentially 2 years from now will significantly change their minds.
We’re immediately going to start putting our 40% to work to grow the Aavegotchi brand this year, and do our best to ensure that the post-curve Aavegotchi is even stronger than where we currently are.
I’m sure the DAO will put its share of the funds to good use as well. We are yin-yang, with different strengths and weaknesses.
How about free builds in the Gotchiverse? Distribute some construction materials for free according to the gotchi held. Let’s start building our Gotchiverse. Of course, there are also paid materials. There are also rare materials.
That way Gotchiverse won’t be left unattended.
Instead of everything being consumed like now.
In fact, it is not free, at least it consumes gas. A large number of free materials will make creativity explode. RF and raffle can also draw some worthless but beautiful building materials.
It is also very interesting to use things of no value to let players create value.
That’s the exciting point. Upgradable items like Gotchiverse and gotchis have endless possibilities.
Please see my original post. The idea is to re-imagine how to attract brand loyalty through clever mechanics and rewards, not continue RF in its current form in perpetuity.
I also see some of these funds to be leveraged by PC for rewards in their own games like Gotchi Guardians.
I don’t know your economics, but holders can be dropped free plays, power-ups etc.
This has been an interesting dialogue to take in. I’m a quieter fan/investor in Aaegotchi, around from just prior to the H1 release, steadily investing all the way. Don’t comment much but do read a lot. I’ve liked so much of what I’ve seen here and since the very start have invested and then re-invested rewards. I held some ghst for a while but eventually put it all in to assets, so I’m all in assets now. I’m compelled to chime in here behind notorious_BTC because I think he’s correct that we’ve reached a point where a growing number of OG investors (who are also big fans of the project) are getting a little scared and weary. No one is quite sure what will happen if the curve is abandoned, but some gesture towards OG asset holders who are going to go the distance with their assets at this point seems not a terrible idea. It was particularly disheartening to see Jarrod of Wagmi Warriors Guild say that he was pulling back from involvement for what I have to assume are some of these same reasons. He’s been a valuable contributor and someone whose view has an impact on other holders, as well the project’s optics.
That said, I’ve never doubted the good intentions of PC and I’ve been blown away by the creativity and general rigor surrounding Aavegotchi. There are so many smart people here but yet the way forward still seems unclear and tensely disagreed upon.
As a (thus far) loyal OG holder with what is a large investment for me—pretty much all tied up in deflated assets—I do appreciate the proposal that originated this thread, specifically, the acknowledgement of OG asset-holders as one of the pillars of the ecosystem. I hope the spirit of that proposal will still be given some consideration. And of course I hope that whatever way it goes, it brings success to all.
Beautifully stated fren and so nice to hear from a long-time gotchigang. I also was saddened by Jarrod’s departure. I fear he is not alone, yet may have been one of the few vocal members expressing their concern. How many other silent majority are out there such as yourselves?
I really hope we can come together as a community and come up with a solution that benefits everyone.
I think distributing 25% of DAI, which is the reserve of GHST holders (!!!) btw, to Gotchi holders via RF is not fair. Furthermore I think the RF plan (6 seasons / 2 years) is not sustainable. As I understand RF it should be mainly funded through sales and trades. If we artificially pump RF rewards, Gotchi prices will follow and plummet even harder after the 6 seasons.
Is this the P&D scheme we want?
I would be fine if the DAO decides after discussing it to chip in some DAI from the curve when we as DAO think it´s time for the next season(s). But I don´t think the fixed 25 % RF rewards and the associated plan is a wise idea.
For what it´s worth I am with Aavegotchi since February 2021 and am almost evenly invested (Gotchis/wearables/land/GHST).
Let’s remember every asset holder started as a GHST holder, exchanging their GHST for the (now) agonizing NFTs
That’s a fair point, although let’s recall that GHST yield and utility was MASSIVELY AND ARTIFICIALLY pumped via the dilution of assets and asset holders, leading to the current predicament.
Appreciate the disclaimer. I find that typically DAO members that argue against protocol rewards, are individuals that have sold off their NFTs, and are now more vested into extracting from the DAO in a riskless way via DAO work/contributions. Nothing wrong with that, but anyone who is looking to contribute to the DAO over the long run (in exchange for grants), and has sold off assets, is now someobody with a conflict of interest when and if/discussing “how bad RF is”. That is easy to say to the few remaining asset holders (let alone buyers, I was buying until recently but have become exhausted of the lecturing of how delusional I am to believe in the product instead of stacking GHST).
There are al;so those that have never spent much in the platform and use it and this DAO as a source of entertainment. This kind of individual, loves to come here and gloat about their wisdom of NOT spending.
I have been buying and acting as exit liquidity for people since launch. I am now exhausted and pretty lonely in acting to defend assets and long term hodlers (and the rewards that keep that paradigm semi-alive). The hivemind of this DAO is succeeding in turning me into yet another asset bear looking to dump. I am not proud of how this DAO celebrates creating the success of others on the back of REKT buyers and labeling them as “apes” or “degens” or “evil whales” for having trusted and believed in the original vision. It is what it is, I don’t see PC or the DAO or its fans looking on how to deliver fair value or the original vision to day-1 buyers. Depressingly, the plan is apparently to bring fresh victims via marketing, get them to ape into GBM and then the cycle can repeat itself.
Edit: I realize I am exaggerating out of exhaustion and frustration. I am not 100% lonely, as generally my ideas/gripes have the backing of fantastic people such as @Immaterial or @actaeon , and there are pockets of individuals in this DAO like the Forge team, explicitly working towards generating new value and use cases for asset holders
However, if you didn’t mean alchemica, when you said materials… that’s totally a new
road we could go down. Non tradable materials that are in essence craftable badges you can put on your land.
Maybe you could elaborate on this with a detailed example because as I see it buying a portal/gotchi at launch or directly after launch for 100 to 400 GHST was profitable because of KIN and XP RF rewards alone if investor was active (petting, voting).
Sure, if you understood how things would play out, you would buy on day one, buy no wearables or land, and focus only on petting and always voting. Similar to just staking GHST, or buying and selling each wave, there were plenty of ways to make money. But god forbid you believed enough to buy and hodl legendary or higher wearables or land at their higher market prices on the bazaar or GBM. The people who sunk their $ into myths and godlikes and lots of parcels are the ones who actually funded the DAO, yet they languish mostly without utility or attention, often way in the red (and in fact they are more often ridiculed for being so foolish as to…uh, fund the project they believed in).
To give a concrete example, Godlike Matrix Eyes sold for ~80k GHST in GBM (cha-ching DAO! cha-ching PC!) They recently sold for ~13k on bazaar. It’s not that prices can’t fall–it’s that they are falling because everyone can see where the profits are(n’t) and just want to dump the useless stuff for the many opportunities elsewhere.
In short, we have sent the signal loud and clear for a long time: “Only fools hodl.” Now we see the effects.
How do land owners benefit directly from the allocation discussed here?
If you believe we should reward frens for hodling our assets and GHST, Rikige´s proposal would be way better although it induces other challenges.
Don´t get me wrong, I am not happy buying parcels for 1k GHST or investing thousands of GHST into tickets when they were between 10 to 8 GHST a piece and before the DAO cancelled the scheduled land sale. But in the end I got into crypto because I believe bail-outs are a mistake and I think the two alternative proposals have certain components of a bail-out.
The allocations we decide on will demonstrate our priorities. Setting aside money for protocol rewards is not a bailout, it’s a fund to give continued value to assets, just like each other suballocation for each other part. If we don’t give $ to PC, or the DAO, or to liquidity, we won’t have those things for very long because they won’t be able to operate stably.
The allocation to pixelcraft shows confidence in and support for the gotchiverse. (and I hope PC becomes more active as we roll out marketing about making the gotchiverse more interesting and fun in order to make landbuyers’ belief pay off)
The allocation to liquidity…well I can’t clearly explain why deep liquidity is important, so I will leave that to others, and trust that it is.
The allocation to the DAO makes sure we can build features like the Forge and games like we are seeing sprout now.
The allocation to protocol rewards means there’s a longterm reason and great 30-second elevator pitch for holding assets, and ensures that the DAO will operate more creatively since it won’t be constantly infighting between rewarding holders and developing new stuff. I guess you can frame it as a bailout, but you could also frame pixelcraft’s allocation as a bailout if you want. I prefer to look at them all in JG1’s way, as the cornerstones of our project.
This is among the top benefits of this proposal that I believe has not been truly appreciated to this point.
We can witness it even now in this very thread. People have very different opinions and interests that conflict about rewards. So we can take care of the spenders and the reward paradigms that funded this whole project since inception, or we can poison pill ourselves by intentionally setting the table for infighting over that 30% until it runs out.
The benefits for every single participant in the ecosystem of having a full 2 years of rewards runway are large. Right now there’s a separate thread /initiative about burning kinship , and its entirely based on the notion that people will stop channeling to keep their kinship ranking for rewards.
See the issue there? As usual, we keep assuming asset holders will foot the bill or sacrifices of things, yet we also presume that they will stick around spending instead of dumping once there are no rewards + more dilution
I’m worried that we dont really know what we are even allocating. Has anyone seen our books? Do we even have books? Can we afford to put x percentage toward this or that?
I honestly feel the most responsible thing to do is table the allocation until we get our house in order.
I prefer to look at them all in JG1’s way, as the cornerstones of our project.