Hey frens, we’ve been working on a feature called “Pet Operator” that allows you to give access control to another address so it can pet your Aavegotchi for you.
The main use case for this feature is to let “you” pet your Gotchi even when it’s bridged onto Ethereum.
However, it’s also possible to give permissions to others, aka the Gotchiconomy Dogwalker @Moon.
Obviously we do not want everyone to delegate petting permissions to Moonbot, so there are some limitations we’ve put in place.
Each petOperator can only be delegated up to 10 Aavegotchis
An Aavegotchi pet by an operator will cost its owner a certain amount of GHST. This is to prevent freeloading and breaking the Kinship game.
The owner is only charged when the petting increases Kinship.
Owners will not be charged for petting their bridged Aavegotchi on Ethereum.
We did some calculations and the bare minimum it should cost for an Aavegotchi to be pet by petOperator is 0.5 GHST. This number was calculated by analyzing the Rarity Farming reward for kinship.
This feature will get implemented because it is necessary to have petOperators if we are sending Gotchis back to Ethereum. But the question is, how much should it cost for an Aavegotchi to be pet by the petOperator?
Look forward to some good discussion! Thanks frens.
Hi! Petting is not easy, 2 times in a day, many time zones, competition, farming. I think petOperator need something like trust score, accuracy score. Also there are need for some safety switch, if petOperator don’t pet for like 1 hour, that petOperator is replaced by another.
Does the fee go to the petOperator, or somewhere else (DAO? PixelCraft? Kinship pool?) If so…
Is it always a flat fee, or does a petOperator have the option to set an additional fee on top of the minimum?
The minimum of 0.5 GHST was arrived at by analyzing the kinship rewards pool to be distributed this farming season, but it’s probably anyone’s guess as to the size of the kinship pool for future seasons…is this cost something that we’ll be able to address and modify in the future? I’d imagine certain players will want to develop an ‘business model’ around this feature. If for whatever reason we were to have a much lower (or higher) than expected kinship pool in a future season, would it make sense to adjust the minimum fee accordingly? Maybe it would be decided once the pool size has been finalized each season?
Currently the fee is set to be split 33% to Pixelcraft and 67% to the Pet Operator.
It’s a flat fee, and although it could be interesting to explore allowing petOperators to charge their own fees on top, we are trying to ship this feature soon so the Ethereum bridge can be launched.
The fee could be adjusted later by DAO vote if it gets too low/high.
Instead of a fee per pet could the pet operators get shares in the Kinship GHST farming awards for that Gotchi? Maybe 33% of Kinship GHST farming awards for that Gotchi are split between the pet operators of that Gotchi based on how many times the operators petted.
I don’t want to make it too cheap for whales to dominate kinship awards they can already use consumables. I am a bit biased because I have multiple gotchis in the top 100 kinship awards.
33/67 seems too rich to me TBH, for what is akin to a tipped service.
Similar to restaurants who keep big part of employees tips, the lowered morale and optics of it are not worth the extra revenue.
I would consider a 18/82 split, or .09 GHST to Pixelcraft and .41 GHST to operator for each petting action. Maybe take that final 0.01 GHST from operator towards DAO, for a clean .40 towards operator.
Full disclosure - I do not plan to hire or provide this service, but think the optics of 33% for Pixelcraft are harmful.
would love to see more of these fees go to burn.
also i am more interested in growing complexity to the kinship gain. as this happens maybe some of the functionality of gotchi development isn’t available to people using petting service. rather than making it uneconomic for people who simply cant be available right at pet unlock and thus are disadvantaged against desk jockies.
I like this idea, what about a flat fee towards pixelcraft and the dao and gotchisitter chooses rate? Also wondering how we could have a rating system? I have several top 100 gotchis and want to lend my services but I don’t see why anybody would choose me over some guy promising perfect timing.
I love the idea that it’s free for Ethereum users, this incentives hodling of gotchis.
My suggestion is that Aavegotchi DAO participant could also receive 21 ‘coupons’ a year. This gives a 4 weeks off of petting for free a year, cost-free, so players can do stuff like go on holidays and take a break even if there gotchi is still on Polygon.
very good point. at least .01 for DAO and .01 burnt sounds more “circle of win”. But def. the greater majority needs to go to the sitter (over 80%) or the activity becomes moot.
Not trying to overcomplicate things here, but two suggestions:
If you elect to use a pet operator, can you set some parameter like the operator can only pet the gotchi after you are late by X minutes. So user has option to still pet their own gotchi, but if they forget and the time threshold passes, it’s fair game for their operator to pet it and they get charged the GHST fee.
Would you consider allowing a wallet address which owns at least one gotchi to be able to have one mutual “Best Fren”, which is another wallet owner that must have at least one gotchi. If the two parties agree to be each others “Best Frens” then either of them can pet each others gotchis (up to 10) at no no charge. There would be a cooldown period of 3-7 days to change your BestFren to avoid abuse. Either wallet holder could dissolve the Best Frenship, but both wallet holders must opt-in to the Best Frenship.
I agree that 33% for pixel craft is a little high.
What if it wasn’t a set fee, but was based on demand? For example, holidays when everyone wants a pet sitter, the price is higher. This could eliminate the need to allow operators to charge extra fees.
And then add an option to tip when your operator took good care of your gotchi!
I don’t understand this. Don’t the owners of bridged Gotchis already get a huge reward by having their Gotchis sold in pieces like stocks? I thought that is what the bridging was all about. To break the Aavagotchi into little pieces that people can buy. Maybe I misunderstood, but if that is so, I think they should be charged more and not less.
Is there a poll or snapshot proposal? Personally, I think it should cost between 1 and 5 GHST. The proposed 0.5 GHST seems much too low.
Aren’t you usually the one to remind people that such limits are meaningless, because people can create infinite wallets? Or does one need to do KYC to be a petOperator?
Was this a figure of speech, or does he actually use a bot? I like Moon a lot, but I find it odd that, on the one hand, you guys try to implement bot protection, and on the other hand, you would incentivize people to use bots to make a few extra GHST from running an automated petOperator service.
So if someone has 11 Gotchis and bridges them all, they couldn’t even pet all of their own Gotchis? Haha that is funny.
Are you sure there is no better way? Couldn’t you have a contract where people can link their Ethereum wallet address with their Polygon wallet address? Then you could use that to have the owner be able to pet their bridged Aavegotchi, but other people would not be able to.
I really feel that providing a platform for anyone (not just Moon) to become a petOperator would ruin the Kinship game in a matter of weeks. Even if you crank up the fees, it would just be another pay to win feature. I don’t like this at all. And with linking wallet addresses, you could still give owners of bridged Aavegotchis the ability to pet, without creating yet another pay to win mechanic.
If you can’t be persuaded that only owners should be able to pet their Gotchis, I think you should adjust that and make it 60% to Pixelcraft, 30 % to petOperator, 10% burned. If you give the operator too big a cut, it will incentivize too many people to make petOperator bots imo.
