How BanklessDAO Can Capitalize on the Guest Pass without compromising our values…
[This is meant to be an open discussion until there is enough discourse to build a full proposal]
A large part of the value our social DAO brings is the ability to participate in the discord and our current guest pass system is is infinitely renewable leading to a lack of value capture and retention.
- This discussion is meant for a new system for monetizing our guest pass without limiting access to our organization
- A No Loss Subscription is the ability for a potential new member to stake tokens in order to receive a guest pass NFT while allowing the DAO to perform safe yield farming strategies to monetize the staked tokens
- Members will have the ability to redeem 100% of their stake while being able to participate in the BanklessDAO discord
- The DAO treasury guild will be able to monetize members that are just exploring the DAO
- Using this basic model we can extract some takeaways
- With the assumption of only 500 guest passes we could expect a yearly revenue of around $2,250
- While this is not a lot of money now, this proposal is following the assumption that either the DAO scales or we choose to scale this as a fiscal policy for our full time members
Should we continue to explore this solution?
Thank you for post Blockboy. Your interested in exploring ideas on how to improve bDAO’s current state of governance/tokenomics is mission critical!
The first question I’d have is whether you can explain this pretty technical solution in simple terms? I watched the video but can’t wrap my head around the mechanics behind it. How’s the value from staked guest passes generated?
Further, how could this saving model proposed by the No Loss Subscription tie into the “Revamping Membership System” that GSEs recommended implementing?
To refresh our minds:
Quote: "The GSE recommends putting a time limit on guess-passes that cannot be renewed after a specified period and implementing an alternative membership system to the one we currently have, which only requires you to hold 35k indefinitely.
- Limited Guest Pass. The current guest pass lasts 14 days and is infinitely renewable, and many people do renew it indefinitely. Our economy (like every other social DAO) rests on memberships.
- The Seasonal Pass is one promising idea. The DAO is not capitalizing on its greatest value: the network. It also has very few inflows and suffers from a lack of focus. We create revenue, focus, and contributor focus by selling season passes. We have an amazing design pattern in the continuous auction we could emulate here . This would also give us visibility into community growth over time because it would create on and offboarding and cohort-based cycles."
I understand the recommendation the following way:
We could continuously auction of NFTs as seasonal passes for bDAO memberships at a defined rate to support commitment to guilds [prime directive = onboarding, education & upskilling members]. A continuous, fixed rate auction provides clarity around the provenance weight of each NFT for the new member, while also providing an ongoing source of funding and monetization for bDAO. → in short: Provenance NFTS (seasonally auctioned) issued by BanklessDAO to grant folks access to public goods - our guilds!
A few more questions: Do you recommend implementing this option instead of limited guest passes, as recommended by GSEs? Further, what implications does it have for seasonal passes? They seem to lose value in No Loss Subscription model.
Its a very interesting take on combining the membership/utility/tlBANK approach with the investment aspect of yield farming locked BANK tokens and could address the issues discussed.
The system above rests on two layers of smart contracts, as I understand it: the provider layer and then the individual user layer. That begs the question of security and auditing/maintenance, as we have to rely on a third party to do this for us in a critical part of our infrastructure.
Hey @senad.eth! Thank you for the feedback and reference to the GSE!!
To clarify the recommendation, these memberships wouldnt be auctioned off, in theory, a user would stake tokens in exchange for a membership pass, then we could preform extremely yield farming strategies those tokens in order to generate revenue. In this situation, the user could get their stake back at any time, and we could generate a yield as they explore the DAO.
To speak to the GSE vision. I agree that our economy rests on our memberships which is why I believe that we should look for ways to monetize it without limiting peoples ability to access it, which is why I believe this proposal is perfect. I think auctioning off season passes is a great idea for categorizing new cohorts and holding their attention span during their onboarding process. I believe the process that I am describing could be use in conjunction with some of these other strategies as it would be a way to grant membership without the cost of liquidity to the user. I believe it could be implemented in the broader ecosystem for all social DAOs, but our guest pass would be a great place to incubate it.
This is a great point, I think from a yield farming standpoint we could find contracts that we are extremely confident in, i.e. their general lending platform. I think the current contracts that I reference would need another set of audits but I believe they follow a simple staking strategy.
Thank you for bringing up this important decision. My understanding for the original purpose of the guest pass is to provide a temporary period to let people experience/participate in our community; then, guest pass holders should be encouraged to earn or buy 35k BANK becoming a full member along the way. So I suggest a time limit cap on guest pass NFT solution, preventing it from becoming a permanent membership level.
This is a good point, I think it will be inherently impossible to prevent someone who wants to keep renewing any process because they could make a new wallet. I think financial incentives could support this but I want to keep this subscription to being free because it increases inclusivity and reduces complexity
I agree that people can bypass the guest pass time limit using different accounts. Still, I would argue most people interested in experiencing DAO probably won’t do that because it will bring a bad experience. These people are whom we are looking to onboard and care about.
I was fortunate to get the BanklessHQ airdrop and L1 membership immediately. I was unfortunate and stupid not to understand wallet security and in June 2021 watched all my Dai, ETH and Bank transfer out. No bank, no membership, Thanks to Frogmonkee and Above Average Joe I was issued a permanent “guest pass” before we had guest passes and the 14 day renewal policy. At age 78 I consider myself somewhat of an unusual DAO member but I like the intent of this proposal. It took me 2 seasons to earn my L1 status. I do not object to guest pass status forever I wouldn’t have remained in bDAO without it. Staking and earning from the staked bank is a progressive solution.
One thing I wanted to bring up is that many of our new joiners are also new to blockchain. I didn’t even have a wallet when I joined. Under this scheme, we wouldn’t allow those people into our community.
BanklessDAO is known as THE DAO for people new to blockchain. I’d hate to lose that positioning as we adjust our guest pass.
This is an interesting concept. It requires membership to be based on holding an LP position. It’s cool and smart, but I don’t think it goes far enough. I still believe that bDAO membership should be subscription based.
Thank you for your response, the main concept here is for the DAO to still be accessible while able to create some sort of fiscal policy for us to general stable operational revenue
I think this is a great point, where/what should be our first touchpoint for people onboarding into the DAO? The website/discord?
Subscription bases would likely allow us to collect more ‘tax’ on our members and be constantly ‘buying back bank’ but at a higher barrier of entry and an increased amount of sell pressure. What are the main benefits that you see with a subscription vs this ‘staking’ subscription
My two-pronged suggestion after the GSE deep was was to:
- DAO subscription (I don’t think we are charging enough for the benefits provided by the DAO)
- Graduated holding requirements for role holders. (higher the trust level, high the required holding.)
I’d be fine with all those holdings being done in the style you suggest above. I just don’t think the yield alone is enough to offset our emissions.