I want to apologize for the confusion this has caused. Another fly in the ointment, which wasn’t advertised, is that we can’t use the original post because Discourse locked it from being edited due to a site wide preference. This is now fixed, but only for future posts, and admins have no way to unlock the old one.
1 Like
Thanks for adding all the details here - I was able to catch up in the Discord, but I also think having the answers here will be helpful for folks who aren’t plugged in 24/7.
My mistake - thanks for the clarification.
It’s a tough situation given the uncertainty around the technical issues with claiming, without any one clear answer I think:
- If you include 2020 holders, those who were subscribers in 2020 but couldn’t claim due to technical reasons will “lose out” on some $BANK because they’ll only receive their 2021 portion, which would be smaller than if everyone only received based on 2021.
- However, if you exclude 2020 holders, people who did legitimately claim in 2020 are also losing out on $BANK that they would have gotten had it been included. Is it fair to 2020 holders that technical issues for some people should cost them from receiving additional airdrops?
It might be a function of how widespread the technical issues are? E.g., if there were so many tech problems that @0x_Lucas thinks the 2020 badge is an incorrect reflection of the state of subscribers in 2020, then so be it, and we shouldn’t use it as a proxy. I don’t have any insight into how the numbers we’re talking about here which makes this conversation difficult.
Regardless, I appreciate all the hard work you and others are putting into this. It’s not easy!
1 Like
Hi folks,
I am closing the current poll and creating a new one with the 2021 only and 2020+2021 options.
This will be on the current proposal.
Stay tuned.
2 Likes
New poll is live! Please vote 
2 Likes
Thanks to everyone for helping to resolve confusion and answer questions. I know this is a sensitive issue, and it appears – especially due to the technical issues associated with 2020 badge holders – that this is a means of moving ahead that may not be perfect, but “good enough.”
2 Likes
Guys, I obviously didn’t need to put a new proposal out after we hashed this issue out in Discord. I’m happy with the resulting poll.
1 Like
It doesn’t make sense to me.
Since Bankless is a community, we are planning to punish those who were giving support from the beginning by cutting off the 2020 badge. Quite the opposite of how to generate a community. Instead of rewarding the antiquity and having claimed the badge at the time, do you want to punish the most loyal followers?
Like I said, I don’t get it.
Maybe it makes sense if we put on the table how many bagde 2020 are claimed and how many “suffered technical problems”.
Its amazing to form part of this growing community! lets get it!!
I am planning to shift all of my tokens to Ledger. I have claimed my badge from different address, if I transfer the badge to another address before the snapshot, would I be able still be able to claim the airdrop using the new address?
Will this be one DAO member, or can it be a small team? I’m very interested in this. I work with data as part of my day job (albeit financial data), and have been looking for an excuse to work with on-chain data. Let me know how I can support!
Yes! It’s based on the address that holds the POAP at the time of snapshot.
I think that’s up to the Genesis Squad; no reason it can’t be a small team IMO (the leader can choose to have people help if they wish).
UPDATE: We are planning to move forward with a Snapshot vote soon. Here’s how it would work:
- Open up voting with the full set of multiple choice options. Why? There is no clear community consensus on the preferred proposal. While 2021 is leading currently, that is biased because those favoring the 2020+2021 proposal likely have disproportionately more BANK, while 2021 is biased since the forum only counts people, not BANK.
- The “either” option is needed to mitigate the fact that the vote will be split with “against.”
- Given how few people voted for “against” (3%), it’s unlikely to attract a significant amount of BANK IMO.
- The proposal with the highest number of votes will be considered the winner if it achieves a simple majority (>50% BANK) with the “either” vote added in.
- If no proposal achieves a simple majority, a plurality isn’t enough to declare the winner. That’s because we can’t assume the people who voted for the other proposal would prefer the plurality winner if only that option were put to a vote with “against.”
- To resolve the above case where there is no majority winner, a run-off can be held. Hopefully this doesn’t happen. Clearly, the community favors some sort of badge-based proposal. Let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
- In the very unlikely event that “against” receives a simple majority, both proposals are toast.
My $0.02: In the interest of the community and resolving this in a timely manner, I urge an “either” vote.
3 Likes
I second this notion. Let the snapshot decide so tech support can get their end set up for what’s decided - that does not need to be written into another proposal with another vote
2 Likes
Hey all,
I would love to be a part of this DAO. Last year it was a post on the medium from David on Eth being the best form of money we’ve ever had. With the context of everything going on, just about everything clicked for me. I went (mostly) all in, and became facinated by the legal implications DAO’s and AMM’s in how societies and commerce are constructed.
Now I have only recently been a bankless subscriber, thinking oh hey here is a DAO with a vibrant community, they have great content with great people and only recently connecting the ideas David wrote about in 2019 to the bankless itself. I’m one of these auditory learners, who spend most of their time in podcasts.
I naively joined on the 4th with the launch of the DAO, thinking id get to be a part. Spend a few days waiting for an email from Lucas only to discover it’s only people before the launch who get in. Then I find this post, and maybe it gets approved. Even then, the bankless badge is only sent out on the first, so even if there is a retroactive airdrop, I’m still out. Ok, I’ll go to uniswap because it’s the place I actually want to be. 1 eth and 5% slippage with no other reasonable way to get in.
My problem is, what do I ascribe the value to. The learning and access to a bankless dao, premium access to bankless content, or the asset that bankless content convinced me to buy in the first place.
Really though, I want the cake and be able to eat it too.
Cheers,
-Nick
@nickpcity If you became a Bankless member after April 30th then you are correct that you are unfortunately not going to get any BANK airdropped. Only those who were a paid subscription member before May 1st are eligible for the airdrops.
However I love your interest in the DAO. I highly recommend reading this thread by @frogmonkee to help understand a part of the energy and direction of the DAO. Hopefully the posts on these forums help you understand the value we are striving for (it is a lot of work in progress)!
Also remember that everything here is still a new process, and I think that your voice is important. There are proposals on this forum that you can be a part of without even owning any BANK (although you won’t be able to vote on any DAO Snapshot votes without owning BANK).
Feel free to stop by the Discord and hang out with others in the #courtyard channel. There are plenty of members who are chatting in there and would love to hear your thoughts (on the DAO or anything crypto).
Take care!
For me 2020+2021 is more fair for everyone. However, the vote is very close. If you count people that are for either one, it could be considered a statistical tie. How will this be solved? Directly in the snapshot vote?
1 Like
That’s the idea; see this post earlier in thread: Badge-Based Distribution for Subscriber Airdrop (FINAL) - #33 by lambda
1 Like
“Let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good”
Yup. There won’t be a perfect solution to this. Team has done a great job driving this to close enough.
During the first airdrop, 2020 and 2021 badge holders got more than twice of BANK than 2021 badge holders. I think it was fair, as the longer you supported the Bankless, the more you got. However, IMO this second airdrop should be redistributed equally to all in order to uplift at least a bit the voting power of 2021 badge holders. Otherwise the gap in voting power will only increase further
1 Like