Utilization of SAFE Tokens Acquired from SafeDAO

Author: Paulitobankless

Start Date: 5/16/2024

End Date: 5/23/2024

Topic: Utilization of SAFE Tokens Acquired from SafeDAO


This proposal outlines two potential courses of action: returning the tokens to the DAO treasury or distributing them as compensation to active members over the past two seasons and the current multisig signers of respective guilds and departments.


In 2022, the DAO received airdropped SAFE tokens from Safe DAO that were initially non-transferable and lacked immediate value. However, recent developments have transformed these tokens into tradable assets, creating a need for strategic decision-making regarding their utilization. The tokens are currently held in the multisig wallets of various guilds and departments within the DAO.

Options for Utilization:

Returning Tokens to DAO Treasury:


  • Centralized management: Consolidating the tokens in the DAO treasury allows for centralized oversight and management, streamlining governance processes.
  • Strategic allocation: The DAO can strategically allocate these tokens for future initiatives, such as funding new projects, incentivizing participation, or supporting community development.
  • Long-term value creation: Holding a significant amount of tokens in the treasury can potentially increase their value over time, contributing to the DAO’s financial sustainability.


  • Limited immediate benefits: Returning the tokens to the treasury may not directly benefit active members or multisig signers in the short term, leading to potential dissatisfaction among stakeholders.
  • Missed opportunity for rewarding contributors: Active members who have contributed significantly to the DAO’s growth may feel undervalued if no direct compensation is provided.

Compensating Active Members and Multisig Signers:


  • Recognition and motivation: Distributing tokens as compensation acknowledges the contributions of active members and multisig signers, boosting morale and incentivizing continued participation.
  • Fairness and transparency: Transparent criteria can be established to determine eligible recipients based on their contributions, ensuring fairness and accountability in the distribution process.
  • Immediate benefits: Providing tangible rewards in the form of tokens can have an immediate positive impact on stakeholders, fostering a sense of belonging and loyalty within the DAO community.


  • Potential governance challenges: Determining fair criteria for distribution and managing expectations among stakeholders can pose governance challenges, requiring clear communication and consensus-building efforts.
  • Risk of token value volatility: The value of tokens distributed as compensation may fluctuate, impacting the perceived fairness of the distribution process and potentially causing dissatisfaction among recipients.

Note: Voting will run for 7 days after which, the poll with the highest vote will be implemented.

Next Steps

  1. If the DAO decides to return funds back to the treasury the process will begin once the voting ends.
  2. If the DAO decides to distribute among members, then each guild and department will decide how they intend to share their tokens among active contributors.


If the vote for the SAFE tokens to be returned to the multisig passes, a memo will be sent out to every guild and department every guild or department that doesn’t comply with returning their safe tokens will be red flagged along with the members that make it up.

  • Return Safe tokens to the DAO multisig
  • Let guilds and departments decide what to do with Safe tokens
0 voters

This is Baer turning in as DAOplomats, which got the majority of the Safe tokens delegated from the DAO.
The safe tokens were airdropped to active users in 2022. since our DAO was one of the few on the chain Orgs back then, we got a relatively good amount of allocation. I favour sending all the tokens back to the main treasury as Orgs are part of the larger BanklessDAO.

As Paulito mentioned, it is very challenging to distribute tokens to the contributions, considering the timeline of the Airdrop. Only a few members of the 22 crew are still active in the DAO.


How many tokens?

Thanks for the proposal @Paulito While it is possible to get social consensus on what to do with tokens which other addresses besides the treasury has received, it is difficult to enforce. That being said I’d like to urge the active community members to return those tokens back to the DAO treasury along with any other tokens they have.

@thethriller So far roughly 70K SAFE has been claimed and delegated to daoplomats.


PM Guild has recently changed the multisig to a 2/5 and sent out all of their tokens: 1. Ethereum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Etherscan

DAOlationships did the same.

I don’t believe these actions are right, and have therefore resigned from the PM Guild multisig. It’s not that I have a problem with disbursing SAFE to contributors, it’s just the way it was done is very suspect.

1 Like

Only addition I have to this is that, projects can and should do what they want with their tokens.

1 Like

One of the questions I have, @Paulito , is what was the reasoning and purpose designated as to why BDAO received airdropped SAFE tokens in 2022? Is there is a forum post regarding this (to understand the historic context).

I’m presuming that when you refer to the “DAO received” , who is the current holder of these SAFE tokens (which dept/project/guild) and what’s the total token amount currently being held that you proposing as an option to return to the multi-sig?

The SAFE multisigs that had been active prior to the airdrop all received tokens, which until recently were non-transferrable. So guilds, depts, projects, and the DAO Vault all have varying amounts of SAFE, much of which is currently delegated to DAOplomats (had to delegate in order to claim).

1 Like

Thanks, @Trewkat , so do you mean that the 70K already claimed, went to contributors in DAOplomats?

1 Like

I have to agree with Jengajojo on this one, it will be hard to enforce if the DAO decides to return SAFE tokens to the multi-sig. However, I do have to agree that, based upon the responses below with more information about these tokens, that I support returning them to the DAO multi-sig. It would obviously be in good faith for each dept/guild/project to comply with the vote of the DAO, but enforcing it will be difficult, other than updating this forum post, and being transparent on which dept/guild/dept did return the tokens by x date.

No, just delegated to them to vote on SAFE DAO proposals with. Most is still sitting in the various multisigs, apart from the PM Guild and DAOlationships ones links mentioned I assume.
So each batch is effectively under the control of the current multisig signers for each group, which is why I chuckle a little at the idea of sending a memo.
I think it’s admirable that we believe the DAO has authority here, and I tend towards voting for return to the main Vault (given that these groups were born out of the DAO entity and supported by BANK from the treasury) but realistically, it’s up to each group. These are the perils associated with decentralised governance I guess.

1 Like

Great response to my question, @Trewkat , thank you! Yes, enforcement would be impossible to implement. But with decentralization comes responsibility for each group and individual. So, the DAO multi-sig can only request returned funds; if that is what the majority votes for, and it’s up to the groups and individuals to publicly comply.

1 Like

gm! a few thoughts:

  1. there is no coercive mechanisms to bring those tokens to the treasury. that’s the org we built, for better or worse. fwiw i would build ENS treasury controls into v2 b/c decentralization is cool, but also, exploitable. and just generally for large orgs folks leave multisigs and i’m not certain that we’ll ever recover the funds in the dozens of multisigs associated with the DAO.
  2. the scarlet letter, memo to file language is honestly sorta just cringe.
  3. if we send the tokens back to the treasury, there is no expectation that we should be participating in SAFE governance. We had DS for that, that’s now gone and has been controverted into a private enterprise. The tokens now delegated to DS should be set w/ the treasury imo. Not sure how DAOplomats got the delegation tho @Jengajojo? Was that not with DS originally? Feels weird to have DAOpomats assume the role of representing the DAO, i get the convo abt aligned contributors but idk feels off man.
  4. This strikes me as a solution seeking a proposal, that multisigs should be free to disburse SAFE tokens to contributors. TBH, we won’t have the governance capacity to deal with delegation, so maybe that’s fine, but it still feels like a cash grab. Can’t shake that feeling, but maybe that’s what we should do as a practical response to where the DAO is.
  5. All org units are independent of the main org, and I’m not sure I see the distinction between Guilds, Depts, and Projects and why Projects are free to keep the funds. I would treat all org units the same here.
  6. That said, b/c there is no coercive mechanisms. maybe we should just advocate for all multisigs to disburse non-BANK funds how they see fit and send BANK back the treasury.
  7. damn i love you, stay strong frens.

agree on this, it would be hard to implement this proposal, if social consensus is reached to send tokens to Treasury
would want to emphasize on the fact that all projects that were eligible for SAFE tokens were DAO projects, and multisig contracts on SAFE were mainly for disbursements of BANK tokens, and that is main reason for being on a side to send tokens to DAO treasury

with all said, maybe @Paulito can revise proposal to include “bounty” for guilds and departments that want to send tokens to treasury - in kind 15-20% can be disbursed to active community members, and rest to be sent to treasury

@links sad to hear that some guilds are working without broader consensus

1 Like

My personal feelings on this is that it’s impossible to enforce sending tokens back to the DAO Vault, so there needs to be some sort of incentive to do so.

In general, a proposal like this is hampered by our previous organization (and part of the reason why the org structure didn’t really work). On paper, there is a big difference between guilds/depts/projects, but in practice, they are all just multisigs. So philosophically I agree that depts/guilds have more moral imperative to send SAFE to the treasury, in practice it doesn’t really matter.

I’m not going to spend too much time on this proposal as I feel like doing so would be divisive. Instead I think we should all learn a lesson about our org structure and make something better.


GM @hirokennelly, I want to add some clarity to this: the DAOplomats got the tokens through the DS-DMAT merge. As I mentioned in the forum on the Announcement post, we are not trying to represent the bDAO, and because of this, we have not taken over the delegation at Collabland or VitaDAO, where the tokens were part of a partnership deal.

and here is an instant from Rowan on this

1 Like

I feel this is a difficult vote as there are principles of the decentralized system that has not solidified in me yet. I’m not sure what I think.

We have safe tokens in the Podcast Hatchery multisig and I feel these belong to the DAO, as we’ve been compensated 1000 BANK/hour until it was decided not to pay.

I guess my loyalty is to bDAO first and project second. Maybe I’m stuck in traditional thinking.

It’s clearer for me now


gm gm Baer, and thanks for the note. TBH I remember but also sorta hazy, my bad for being lazy and not looking back - wrote that post fast in a sorta emotional state.

you know i loved DS and the mission, but never really had a great grasp on what you and jenga were doing with the other entity and how it tied in to the work here. regardless of what i may think of the merger language, i trust you have the best interests of the mission at heart.

cheers fren, and hopefully i get to meet you like i did jenga in Denver. great dude.


I’d usually vote for decentralization, to let projects and guilds decide.

But in a time of reorganization, and seeking value alignment, I believe showing commitment to the movement, to the DAO, to its new structure, is important.

So I’d encourage the projects and guilds to return the tokens to the DAO multisig instead of thinking of personal gain. Especially as a fair distribution of the tokens would require a lot of discussion and agreement, as Paulito points out.


The guild and department members were the ones putting the work into their orgs and they should be in control of all those assets. The DAO always got a 10% cut of anything I ever earned for any guild or department, so I figured it was made whole. Giving each org unit some form of autonomy always seemed like a step in the right direction.

To be honest, I’d preferred to see each guild agree to custody all the SAFE tokens and only sell them off as a last resort. Not to be used as a form of compensation.

Disclaimer: I received 150 SAFE from DAOlationships, and I’m ready to return them to the DAO or whatever consensus is reached.