[Temp Check] ENS Token 2nd Airdrop

DAO-Wide Temp Check
68

I think this is fair regarding the criteria/eligibility, but I think consensus on the goal of distributing the 5.4M unclaimed tokens might be an important first step.

In other words maybe it’s helpful to look at this temp check as two prongs:

  1. Is distributing the 5.4M unclaimed tokens from the airdrop and fulfilling the initial tokenomics (25M tokens total distributed to the community) a valid goal?

If no, then we can stop right there.

If yes, then:

  1. Assemble a committee to develop the eligibility/criteria for distributing the 5.4M unclaimed tokens to best fulfill the original tokenomics consistent with the meaningful goal of widely distributing the governance/voting power while minimizing any potential gaming and put that plan before the community for review/revision before the final version goes to a potential proposal.
4 Likes
69

@thenftverse.eth please do not use all caps.

Nobody is treating you indifferently. There is a process that is required to be followed by everyone.
If you feel like you are getting push back then the Temp Check is effectively doing it’s job. You are receiving negative feedback that doens’t quite support what you are proposing. There may be a lot of support for the idea if you present it in a way that covers all concerns that individuals might have.

Also please be mindful that; right now – in Q12023, an airdrop is not the main focus of the DAO, people are very busy working on projects that have been discussed for months, people are traveling to conferences and networking with other Ethereans. ETH Denver is coming up, the name wrapper is about to launch.

What you are presenting is a much larger project than most of the DAO would care to focus on right now.
That’s my take on it and I think many people would agree with that.

In the meantime if you feel super strong about this, maybe presenting some questions to the forum like this to start…

1.) What incentive to the community will second airdrop provide?

2.) Looking at the first airdrop, what are some challenges that were faced? What was successful?

3.) How many tokens were sold by recipients immediately after? How was the market affected by that?

4.) How many ENS Governance token recipients still have all or percentage of their tokens today?

5.) How many of those who are still holding are actively taking part in governance discussion on forum ?

6.) What percentage of token recipients have voted at least one time in the past year?

7.) What is the incentive for another airdrop ? Why are the tokens wanted?

8.) Will another airdrop stimulate more people to build or will builders who dont receive them feel left out again?

9.) Should a token claim be open to all .eth holders? Or should we look and measure discussion forum
contribution statistics to use as a weighted reference.

After all the token is for the DAO Governance voting and is not by any means a security.

So who would benefit from a drop more? Individuals who are already contribution daily, weekly and for the past year or allowing someone to claim the tokens and then sell them off into the market without considering contributing to DAO

70

See. This is the type of energy I am talking about. Is there a policy I am unaware of regarding using all caps? I am doing my best to follow all rules. I used all CAPS to preface my little speech - After all, I was standing on a soapbox. Damn, why are yall so sensitive and emotional. This is a “Temp Check”.

I have made an effort to respectful throughout this entire process. I never said my “Temp Check” is the epitome of format. It’s my first one sheeesh! I have never stated at any point that this should be a main focus.

I am just to end this response here. I am not the type to keep going back and forth. I will review the info outlined in your response. Shout out to ALL the first time people in the community who submit a temp check going forward. Let my experience serve as the example of how it could possibly be received.

I would appreciate people not put words in my mouth or take out frustrations on me due to a “Temp Check” topic.

2 Likes
71

Yeah, No worries. I just provided you some guidance and gave you my time of day. We are not here to argue about perceived brevity from the context of text.

On that note. Good Luck with your initiative.

72

Thank you. Have a great day! :beers:

73

Actually, I believe this discussion has surfaced multiple current issues which are likely to perpetuate themselves.

These are structural in issue, and DAO members would do well to accept that these issues can be improved with more distributed governance.

Instead of framing the issue as a mercantilist issue, it might be more constructive to truly consider the underlying issues that are being proposed.

I also believe that the concerns with forum or ENS governance participation can be alleviated with outreach from DAO members to the community in natural areas of congregation. I see more and more community members coming on board, much less the other way round.

Also, I dont understand how @thenftverse.eth survey and his approach has been not followed the process?

Seems pretty respectable, SMART (Specific, measurable, actionable, relevant and time based)

  1. Temp Check, gathering comments and feedback
  2. Survey
  3. Review and round up (with further actions to take)

How should participants do otherwise?

2 Likes
75

Apologies, but I don’t see how @thenftverse.eth didn’t do that.

76

Thank you sir for the kind words and feedback. I have tried my best to follow the process, while also staying within the Forum policy.

image
image1242×1080 157 KB

2 Likes
77

Ladies and Gentleman,

The internal Temp Check first poll (15 total votes) resulted in “No Action” for options related the 5.4 Million ENS tokens. I will now conduct a external Temp Check poll using Twitter. This will give some of the ENS community the opportunity to select an option. Many have stated they have not gained access to comment in the DAO Forum. I will post the poll within the next 48 hours. Thank you.

3 Likes
78

I do not support using twitter metrics for input to make DAO related decisions. In my opinion, if the issue is important enough, individuals will take the time to voice them in the proper channel.

1 Like
79

IMO, it would have been better to give time for the survey to get more responses. 15 seems a bit little and unrepresentative.

4 Likes
80

@006.eth totally agree. There is no way 15 votes give true representation, but it’s hard to know how long is long enough to have kept the original poll open. I am playing this entire process by ear. I could relaunch a second poll here in the forum (unless I am violating another rule I am unaware of :open_mouth::rofl:). Maybe I will try some additional outreach to get more community members to take part in the poll. Many stated they were unable to comment, but only able to show support using emojis. I do want to make sure people who are trying to access the forum are given a fair chance to participate. I will look into recreating the internal poll.

Actually, I just reopened the original poll :grin:

2 Likes
81

Nothing wrong with a Twitter poll. I’d be curious to see the results, and it doesn’t mean that the DAO suddenly has to abide by those results.

Also, they can use a little caps here and there. No need to police them - they’re holding a pretty good discussion thread here and at least getting the blood flowing.

3 Likes
82

Twitter poll initiated. Which includes a link pointing back to this Temp Check.

https://twitter.com/officialethnerd/status/1625493362823544832?s=46&t=5SCctnw00tvfywAXCPywrA

1 Like
83

I voted for “Allowing each .eth a vote without needing to distribute ENS tokens that can be sold.” because I understand the concerns around $ENS being sold. Long term it still ends up as a whoever has most money wins.

I would like to say that the problem of voting distribution and engagement should be something that existing delegates should look deeper into. Again, 80% of the ENS users came AFTER the airdrop. They are simply unable to vote. A fews weeks ago, I thought that maybe people will buy $ENS but honestly, even if some do, the quantity will not be enough when compared to the top 5 holders of the token.

So again, my “plead” is for the existing ENS delegates to think if there should be more distributed and engaged voting in ENS. ENS has grown a lot of in last 12 months. It needs an improved structure for long term growth. The community is what uses ENS and what drives ever more adoption. Engage the community and ENS will do even better.

Here is a recent example from Uniswap where the holders improved their structure. https://www.coindesk.com/web3/2022/12/21/uniswap-dao-community-members-vote-in-favor-of-new-governance-process/

Devin Walsh, director of the Uniswap Foundation, said the proposal seeks to address inefficiencies in the governance structure with changes such as increasing the quorum – or amount of UNI represented – for voting and reducing the number of votes to pass a proposal.

“The intention of the off-chain votes is to provide a signal to the community that there’s consensus on a proposal,” Walsh told CoinDesk. “What we found is you only need one off-chain vote to achieve that benefit of a signal, and requiring the community to vote twice is redundant and unnecessary.”

The move to ease governance is part of an effort to empower community members to participate in the protocol’s decentralized autonomous organization (DAO).

2 Likes
84

Thank you for added information and research conducted.

85

This is all very interesting.
It is important to avoid gamification,
and preventing risks & vector attacks, to the ENS Protocol.

People getting paid for their work, is separate then giving all ENS holders free money.

  1. Giving a 2nd airdrop for the sake of a 2nd airdrop is not justification for a 2nd airdrop.
  2. Additionally, people would likely sell their ENS Votes…Then just demand a 3rd airdrop.
  3. What is the beneficial objective? The goals? The strategy; How do we avoid gamification?

This was an interesting quote-tweet:

Scenario: 5.4m tokens airdropped, ENS token price crashes to 15 cents, an attacker scoops up 3 million tokens and then starts voting to rob the DAO of all funds, increases renewal prices to $99999/yr for everyone else

gg ENS is broken. but keep voting yes because its free money
https://twitter.com/MAB/status/1625540696617762820

https://twitter.com/MAB/status/1625540696617762820

2 Likes
86

Interesting resource. Optimism recently did a 2nd airdrop as well! – Airdrop 2 | Optimism Docs. “Optimism’s Airdrop #2 distributes 11,742,277.10 OP to 307,965 unique addresses to reward positive-sum governance participation and power users of Optimism Mainnet. A snapshot of addresses was taken on 01-20-2023 0:00 UTC.”

You can look into it and see all the details of how they did their airdrop to maximize governance participation. This is something very similar to what we need as well.

This is an oversimplification with a huge assumption predicated on, most likely, other DeFi projects’ airdrops where a lot of people dump immediately after. It can be avoided with carefully thought out criteria for the 2nd airdrop (see Optimism above as an example), or even other mechanisms such as linear vesting of newly airdropped tokens, something similar to what Gnosis Safe is currently doing.

I would, however, very much like to see how many people dumped after the first airdrop. Even that wouldn’t be that accurate because it was at the peak of the bull market and everything went crashing down in the months ahead.

1 Like
87

Of all scenarios you could have chosen to make an example of, why choose the absolute worst case scenario. Are you saying there is absolutely no upside to this proposal, only a downside? Are you taking a holistic view or singular bias view?

I believe with the right criteria/qualifier guidelines implemented, the 5.4 million $ENS tokens could be distributed fairly. First, we must get pass this stage to have that discussion, because inserting that conversation here would only derail the focus.

The 2nd airdrop would satisfy the foundational goal of DAO’s governance balance for the community %. A 3rd airdrop would be a moot point due to this. The only reason why a 2nd airdrop came into play was due to the remaining 5.4 million $ENS unclaimed. Prior to this temp check, I don’t think anyone has ever brought a legitimate case forward.

Thanks for the feedback GP.

1 Like
88

I think you may have misunderstood my statement based on response you made.
I don’t think that a paragraph of all caps is necessary. The brevity is enough to know that someone is yelling.

I did not declare that a person can not make a twitter poll. I simply stated my position is that I do not believe implementing results from twitter should be used to influence a decision that the DAO makes.

Reason being, twitter polls can easily be gamed and do not poll the community equivocally. Like @garypalmerjr said.

Twitter is not a controlled stable environment.Outside of seeing this link here on the forum page, I have not seen this on my twitter feed. You poll is likely to stay in the circle of your following and only receive the response that gears towards a specific agenda within your circle. While using this forum there is no argument against restricted visibility that would cause a proportionally greater sentiment to an initiative that may or may not reflect the opinions of all persons who wish to be active in the governance of ENS protocol.

Participation is voluntary and the mere fact that ‘having an ENS name warrants participation’ is a false narrative. You might be asking ‘but the first airdrop…?’. Yes that gave equal opportunity to those who fell within the parameters the project creators decided on.

Simply look at the badges page for the DAO and compare that to how many people received the first airdrop.

767 people have been active on the forum for at least one year and made a minimum of 1 post
197 people have received the role ‘Member’
26 people have received the role ‘Regular’
13 people have received the role ’ Leader’

Don’t forget that ENS doesn’t have the same type of income as other protocols. ENS needs to protect it’s future with the assets it has. Distributing them amongst the community just so that they will be dissolved into other economies is not the right strategy or securing the stability in ENS’ future.

@cap
Optimism also has a completely different income mechanism than ENS. On the lowest end of foreseeable income, ENS needs to estimate at minimum of 1 name registered per address, per year…again at minimum.
That metric is far different from using a protocol that has numerous ways of collecting an income which is based on a minimum of just one on-chain interaction. (correct me if I am wrong)

1 Like