Proposal: Limit raffles to 1 per haunt

There is a concern among some in the community that because there are no set rules for when and how many wearables gets released, that this will significantly dilute the value of existing wearables.

I propose the following:

That wearables (capped to a maximum of 14000 per release) only be released after a haunt of 10000 Gotchis has occurred.

If you agree to this please vote - “I concur”
If you disagree please vote - “I object”
If you feel this is an important issue and needs another solution please vote - “Let’s look at other options”.


  • I concur
  • I object
  • Let’s look at other options

0 voters


don’t agree nor disagree with 1 raffle per haunt, but i do think there needs to be a clear supply schedule, or a clear process in which the supply schedule is determined (via DAO, PixelCraft, flipping a coin etc)


I second this. I don’t have the answer myself but a schedule would be incredibly important. Every month, quarter, or starting with more haunts and then less over time, etc. Whatever is decided needs to be known :slight_smile:


It feels like having an identifier of which haunt the wearable is from and possibly haunt specific affinity bonus. So like if you are wearing items from all of the same haunt - matching your gotchi’s haunt - there is a bonus. So a haunt 1 gotchi wearing haunt 1 wearables is valuable.


not just raffles though. items entering the shop through direct sales from the team needs to follow a clear plan as well. just releasing at will is scaring me.

1 Like

Love this idea. This probably would get passed in a community proposal if you wrote it up.

Agreed. Coderdan mentioned this as well as a requirement for a proposal. Right now just trying to gain some traction with this discussion. So that it can have a chance at the snapshot vote. Need more people engaging though with ideas, so thanks for contributing. Will amend it if needed, but will definitely need to add Maall releases as well.

Let’s look at other options

i like the direction

1 Like

Cool man, I know my proposal is missing the mark a bit. Any suggestions? Cheers for engaging.

What would be the most ideal schedule for you? All good if you aren’t sure either.

I’ve heard of your idea by a couple of other people as well - to add less over time. I like it. Eventually would need to hit a minimum though, otherwise would end up with no new wearables, which is also a problem long term.

I’m not too sure either, I reckon we’d want to see some numbers such as wearable to gotchi ratio, discussing if we want oversupply of gotchis or wearables or both. I don’t know whether common to legendary wearables should hold value or be accessible to everyone at some given price, but I do know that holding wearables from raffles 1 to 3 will have long term collectible value, given that Aavegotchi takes off. Hard question to answer tbh :sweat_smile:

Starting the conversation around it is definitely good though, we need some agreed upon economics with inflation schedule of wearables/gotchis otherwise this will just turn into a casino

1 Like

Great point. I think if we can find another project that has done something kind of similar (meaning wearables and characters to clothe them), and it worked out well, then we can just use that ratio or other idea. If anyone knows of one, hopefully they see this and respond.

this makes a ton of sense

it will allow for more value to be created from items as well

Could essentially create rarity based around different items from each haunt

Great idea!

1 Like

Yeah, I like the idea of distinguishing the original wearables from the other wearables (original wearables would be the first 3 raffles and the 1st Maall sale wearables). Will add value over time. In 2 years time, not many new comers will know when the pajama hat or common wizard hat was first released.

You know you can make polls right?

  • vote1
  • vote2

0 voters

at the gear icon topright of a post when editing.
Regardless… I say we keep raffles to be a random occurrence but keep a minimum distance between raffles. wether that’s 3 months or 6 I don’t know.

Cheers for letting me know. Will use from now on.

That option would be at least better than what is currently happening. Problem occurs if no new haunts get voted in, so if wearables just keep happening, eventually there will be an oversupply, and those that were early investors would lose out the most. Normally, the early investors (and that is what we all are, whether we like to admit it or not) are the ones that benefit over time.

For some reason I can no longer edit my post. I click the 3 dots and no edit button appears. Do you know how I can?

Added a poll to the original post.

Muchos gracias Moon.