I know this might be controversial given the preference for privacy but restricting the distribution of portals at haunts to those that have completed KYC comes with its advantages.
People exploiting the use of multiple addresses to get around the ape tax will be constrained by this.
We can even put a cap on the number of portals per KYC’ed address.
Also, this has the potential to prevent ‘bad’ money from coming into the game from illegal activity/money laundering, etc.
Moved to the Ideas category since this is not a fleshed out proposal yet. I am also against it, as someone who lives in the US, where most projects which require KYC would exclude.
I am against this. First of all, Data that is collected has a tendency to be leaked, sold or hacked.
“illegal money/laundering” this is a mantra that’s whole purpose is to stain crypto by the governments with media.
Initial sale event is always a rush and not everyone can get in.
The H1 Portal sale was fair. I’m only against their decision to whip us with their decision to control our transaction fees.
Is it possible to implement KYC solely for the purpose of executing Gotchi erc721 and erc1155 transactions separate an apart from GHST erc20 transactions? As an American it definitely sucked not being able to obtain GHST off the bonding curve.
Yet there are benefits to having identity management protocols for things like DAO voting and the proposed haunt distribution process. Any identity management scheme that impedes broad Gotchi participation is ill advised, imho. Also, I think it would be a very heavily lift for the devs at this time when so many other functional areas demand attention.
I see 0 reason why we should even think about adding more KYC to the process. Anti-bot measures + restricting purchasing to 1-5 Portals per txn should solve the majority of issues with the Haunt drop.