Awesome work, thank you !!
If I’m not mistaken, the holders who have more than 35000 BANK are now 1752.
It would be interesting to cross this data with the number of Discord members who post at least 3 times a week, so as to understand the level of engagement of the holders in the community. Could you tell me if there is Discord data to analyze?
At that point other lines of reasoning could be:
- understand the profile of the members (as per the form presented by analysts and educators)
- how to increase the value of the DAO to increase the engagement of the members and the enrollment of new participants
- contribution ratio between members and guest pass
- whether to make the guest passes only temporary and after an X number of weeks they should either acquire the BANK or pay a monthly membership (as per Kouros project)
- which profile (s) to give to the DAO: community of makers, community of artists, defi community, fluid community …
At an empirical level, the second airdrop does not seem to me to have led to a consistent influx of participants who presented themselves to the community and made themselves available to contribute. This would mean that non-members who ask to contribute do so regardless of already having a certain amount of BANK. This is also the classic participation dynamic that occurs in almost all communities.
But obviously only the analysis of the data will be able to confirm this and explain the possible usefulness of future airdrops.
To date I think that the starting point in the reasoning on the membership threshold must pass from point (4). Unlimited guest passes result in the elimination of the BANK ownership criterion to be considered members, even if without voting.
This can have several consequences, both positive and negative.
PRO
- Opening the community to anyone who wants to participate and get busy, without eligibility thresholds and wealth criteria
- Perhaps a greater commitment on the part of all, as there are no elective criteria
VERSUS
- The need to distinguish between DAO (with new eligibility criteria, which could also have even just 1 BANK) and community
- The collapse of usefulness in owning the BANK token, which must therefore be rethought on new criteria, and the possible consequence of mass sales of the token on the market
- Elimination of a possible revenue stream for the DAO, that of temporary memberships for non-members who have the minimum threshold of DAO