Why is a second round of air drops not being talked about? The community and amount of holders have almost doubled if not tripled. So many more people are in the ens community now. Take the snapshot on the 4th of may. The DAO mad over a million dollars yesterday. The people registering names and paying renewal fees after the first snapshot.
I don’t think the DAO can authorize additional airdrops from the treasury because the funds belong to the Foundation Company not the DAO.
However, maybe these self organizing 3/4 digit ENS communities should be recognized/rewarded by the DAO because of the amount of ENS registration fees and the additional attention they brought to ENS.
While an airdrop might not be available to reward these new ENS users, I do think the DAO has the power to consider lowering the annual registration fee for 3/4 digits. It would probably very difficult to pass that kind of proposal, but that may be worth a temp check.
The DAO is the foundation company. The DAO could choose to issue an airdrop if it wanted.
I don’t think it should, personally.
Nick.eth why not? You do realize it brings so much more to the community. It was a catalyst it’s self into the last great run the NFT community as a whole had. An I know people multiple people with 200 plus domains/names that got in after the snapshot. Why not reward and include them into the DAO process as a whole. Some brilliant people. Just food for thought. Why not put it up for vote.
I personally don’t feel a second airdrop is beneficial at this point.
ENS is already the naming system of a huge part of the web3 ecosystem. Driving adoption for individuals has, I would argue, moved from the organic community efforts to wider, institution driven adoption (e.g. people seeing beer.eth and fallon.eth and wanting to join the fold).
I would be keen to hear Sad, from your perspective as to what you think the advantages and disadvantages of a second airdrop would be.
Equally, I would be interested in hearing ideas how else we could reward the community not just through issuing tokens.
Lastly, if you did do a second round why should the reward be correlated with the number of addresses held? How do you reward the small players who are there with only one address (due to financial constraints or whatever) vs those with 200 plus addresses?
I don’t think an airdrop associated with how much someone has spent on buying domains / farming names for unique wallet addresses would align with ENS’s values and it’s standing as a public good.
It should based on how many you hold each one a equal value over 4 and the ones that are 3 to 4 maybe a little more. I just don’t personally see why you wouldn’t want that token to hit the ecosystem. It takes 10k ens token to even propose a real proposal. That’s roughly 180K usd. So if they were to do another that grants more people to continue to buy and register ens domains which would happen. An make it to where the newer people that came in after the first snapshot delegate their votes. It feels like the DAO team are being gate keepers on all this. Which is wild. Take a vote. Let the masses vote. It’s a DAO correct. If not it’s just like a hey thanks for registering and putting more money into our DAO now go buy ens token too. Feels like the us government. Does the DAO counsel have a term limits I guess to say? Like if not we have a board of Nancy Pelosi’s and Mitch mcconnell‘s. And Brantley was Trump they didn’t like him.
Hey! Nancy Pelosi is pretty harsh name to be throwing around.
Jokes aside, and to be fair, you are more than welcome to craft an informative temp check and proposal in accordance with established DAO procedure.
For any formal proposal, regardless of content, it should be presented in alignment with standard formats. You can read about this on our Governance Docs, which provides links to templates on Github.
One model for success would be to look at [EP2]. This was presented in Executive Proposal format from the onset, and the first edit included an informal poll to gauge interest.
If you don’t hold enough voting power to initiate an EP, have made a clear case, and have demonstrated support, I see it as my job as a steward to facilitate this process by connecting you with someone who can push it forward.
Personally, I don’t think anyone is trying to gatekeep, you’re just not finding the support you hoped for. I sense some frustration, but the way this is being presented is not constructive as it could be.
To Coltron.eth’s point if you can give a clear understanding as to the why then carrying out the formal proposal I am certain would be supported by some.
Again, as I mentioned above, step back and explain why it should be issued and how you think the airdrop should be structured. Do you use the same variables as the 1st (such as length of time owning said address etc etc)? Or in your eyes do you think it should be based purely on how many addresses you own?
What do you think the advantages and disadvantages of doing it are? Nothing is going to be 100% perfect so it is good to know what you see as the downsides too.
Wow I thought additional airdrops were off limits. I know a Foundation Company isn’t exactly a non-profit, still it seems problematic for the DAO to vote to self-distribute the ENS Foundation treasury funds.
I agree with you I don’t think the DAO should do a 2nd $ENS airdrop at this time.
I do see a 2nd airdrop being a potential tool to encourage adoption/usage (say for example an airdrop to all ENS names with decentralized websites), but there are a lot of concerns of the DAO voting power dynamics, potential self-dealing/airdrop farming, and a general interest in preserving the DAO treasury.
Do you have thoughts on potential proposals to prohibit future airdrops (as a safeguard against unmitigated DAO voting power) or are there any specific airdrops you have considered/support?
Why is everyone so against this. Poll the community gauge interest trust me it’s there. Same terms as the first. Are you guys not seeing the volume of new people coming in? Seems like the Dao and other holders are worried about the price per token. Really strange and off putting. Coltron that frustration you sense is there because i dont feel like the masses who are registering these domains are getting much from the DAO. Maybe i am blind too what we are getting.Even if there was 2nd round there could be requirements as the there was one the first. example. leave out the 1st round domains that already have been claimed against. Only new domains registered after the first snapshot. This process if fairly simple. Poll the community gauge interest. or in all reality you could ignore me I’m a nobody. I don’t have 10K ens tokens so who am i. I’ll keep paying my .2 fee every year for my 3 letter / digit domains and so on for my 4’s and so on.
You can open an informal poll yourself; in fact we all encourage it so that you can be certain that there is no gatekeeping. Be sure to tag it as ‘Temp Check’. In the forum here, there is an option to include informal polls, like this:
- Not now, maybe later
Your last post also expresses this sentiment, but I think this is a misunderstanding. To be involved in the DAO process (you’re doing now!) with meaningful discussions and working as an active contributor, you do not need to hold any $ENS.
A perfect example of this would be myself as an ENS Steward with 340 active delegations. Also, some of the contributors in the Community WG, like @estmcmxci @zadok7 and even @daylon.eth are by no means $ENS whales. Still, they are reaching out on behalf of the DAO through their subgroups, looking to create partnerships, and generating content that makes a difference.
Yes, to vote, you need to hold a fraction of 1 $ENS, but voting, albeit significant, is a tiny part of the actual DAO process. Think: iceberg model.
If you feel excluded, I’d be happy to try and close the gap, but at this time it may not be an airdrop unless you follow-through properly as people are suggesting. If merely wanting to be involved (which there are little barriers) is your chief complaint, I may ask you to ponder if your motivation is more about financial compensation.
Again, you do not need to hold any $ENS to take an active role in the DAO!
I agree with what this man is saying and you should too
The DAO could enact a constitutional amendment to prohibit another airdrop. Ultimately, anything it can enact it can revoke, but it can set the threshold higher by making it part of the constitution.
While I don’t think there’s any good reason to do an airdrop now, I can’t totally rule out there being circumstances in the future in which it might make sense, so personally I think a social consensus of extreme skepticism is the best option for now.
I would much rather see the DAO adopt an extremely liberal grant strategy to dish out a bunch of $ENS to teams that want to build on top of ENS than do another airdrop. I think that would deliver far more value to ENS name holders than tokens would, easily.
Edit: Although I will add that if we expect these grants to pay for work, we’re better off spending treasury funds on that than giving out ENS tokens. It might even be a reasonable principle to say that proactive grant funding should use ETH or USDC, while retroactive funding can use $ENS.
Funny it’s all the delegates saying this. Post the poll on twitter and let the people talk.
Delegates are the voters and delegates decide what the DAO should do, not Twitter degen crowd with little to no skin in the game
IMO, even the community need the 2nd airdrop, it’s not the right time for the moment. DAO need an enough long term to let ENS gain more growth and observe if something is deserved to get airdrop.
Point proven. mitch mcconnell. Twitter Degen? This guy represents us. Sike. You sir, respectfully shouldn’t be deciding anything. It’s us “Twitter Degens” that register and got this DAO over 1 million in a day. I’ll be sure to let Bloom and the rest of the peasants know how you feel.