GEAR Token - Testers & Discord

Yesterday an article on the distribution and governance came out. It is pretty big, so most of the questions get answered if you dive into it for like 5-10 minutes. One part deserves a few more words to discuss.

We all know the panacea of airdrops (aka early members / LPs / users) snapshot to get tokens. It’s grown to the extreme level of entitlement where people now want retroactive stuff for their tweets lmao. Is it right or wrong? Idk, from one perspective - users wanna own what they use (muh web3 ownership bro) - from the other perspective, forcing communities to gib tokens might be a bit too extreme if you just cliked some buttons. But who are you to value contributions as one person? It’s too subjective. So… we didn’t.

Are there bots then? Personally speaking, well… duh, most likely. Is there a very solid percentage of real users and testers? - YES. And that’s what counts. I mean, maybe I am being too pessimistic, and the bot ratio is extremely low in Gearbox? How about you cross-check: GitHub - Gearbox-protocol/launch-snapshot.

For Discord, you can clearly see the “value” ratio is pretty good. Happy with it. For testers, judging from some chats already - I would assume some “smart testing” (lol) took place. And so be it. Most often you will find the distribution will be fairly flat without jumps, so you wouldn’t be able to make cutoffs. You could think that by cutting the long tail you are fixing the issue, but the really smart airdroppers actually test A LOT, so you would be cutting the real users then from the bottom. There is no perfect solution for this.

Accept it and move on, this is is just a drop in the sea

These snapshots are never perfect, you are always bound to go wrong and piss people off. As such, why not just do a distribution which pisses the least amount of people off? You never know - an airdropper can turn into an amazing supporter, a botter might end up building something with the protocol, and so on. You shouldn’t exclude such options. But if you do the cutoff too strict, you are SURELY gonna get fked by your early members. Yes you will save up on 0.5% of your total supply (at best?) and close the gates for a good number of people some of which genuinely wanted to be part of your DAO. Bad decision, imho.

Happy with the result overall! Love the early community, and don’t be upset even if you didn’t make in this cut. DAO has >50% so just contribute, do work, and let’s build it together. <3

TO_DO?

There is no to-do per se here, because cutting people NOW would be dull. However, if somebody finds an address that literally airdropped test tokens to 100 other ones - then it’s clear botting. That stuff would be totally okay to cut off… and you would take a part of their reward lol?

Otherwise, well done to everyone, and thank you! Let’s try to make a cool DAO :slight_smile:

10 Likes

Unfortunately when I started using test net snap shot was taken and I was deprived off. Any how I am and will be part of the team to participate and build the community. Everything for the best. I endorsed the strong views and comments of ivangbi

Seems that some patters were found! Please continue there:

I think need more and more smart testing ,cuz too many people just wanna airdrop

GM @ivangbi

Our Discord and Testers were an important part of our prelaunch and I look forward to them formally being part of our DAO (through $GEAR) soon. I hope many of them took part in the Genesis event too.

The GEAR token is presently not tradable, but as per our 1st Contributoooor call it will be as soon as we work on a way to bring that forward.

I am not proposing a change to who receives GEAR but I would like to propose a new way HOW these members receive their GEAR.

You may be aware of UMA’s KPI options. This product allows teams such as ours to use KPI tokens for a multitude of purposes including airdrops and Liquidity Mining (more on LM later…). I would like to suggest that we move this airdrop from straight GEAR tokens to a KPI option on Gear tokens based upon our success.

We could stagger these KPI options in tranches over a year or do one single drop. The KPI should be Loan value $ issued, but could be based on other on chain metrics. A tranched version would allow us to drop up to one quarter of the GEAR each calendar quarter. This further aligns our airdrop recipients with our protocol and a tranched version aligns that over a longer period of time.

As a DAO I know we will need to consider this issue carefully. I am very happy to put together a full proposal for forum consensus after comment is received here. I know UMA will be able to help on the technicals for implementation too.

Many thanks.

1 Like

Chief, thanks for the message! KPI Options - for what would you set them up for, which KPIs?

One of these is being considered, please go to gear-econ on Discord and read there. It’s in the message history :slight_smile:

Does the KPI idea imply that CA minters and core contributors will be eventually governing the DAO for quite some time?

I am not sure this is anyhow related. Anyway, this topic is not for that. Continue in gear-econ.

Accept it and move on, this is is just a drop in the sea

These snapshots are never perfect, you are always bound to go wrong and piss people off. As such, why not just do a distribution which pisses the least amount of people off? You never know - an airdropper can turn into an amazing supporter, a botter might end up building something with the protocol, and so on. You shouldn’t exclude such options. But if you do the cutoff too strict, you are SURELY gonna get fked by your early members. Yes you will save up on 0.5% of your total supply (at best?) and close the gates for a good number of people some of which genuinely wanted to be part of your DAO. Bad decision, imho.

I just read your description of airdrop again. I really think your pattern is very big. I hope I can do something for the better development of our community.

There are indeed many people who get airdrop. Maybe they once participated in the project test for possible airdrop, but now they really love this project.

Turn all participants into the most loyal users of the project. My friend once said that the people who know the project best are early participants.

The problem is not “too many ppl”.

If the case were “100 humans were participating in discord with their 100 accounts and made testing with 100 addresses” – it would be perfectly Ok, it’s how it was meant to be.

The “botting” case (I presume it’s what you imply) is “1 (one) human was participating in discord with 100 fake accounts and made testing with his 100 addresses”.

The “botting” problem is exactly “too few ppl”. And I doubt the project will see any good from those ppl.

1 Like

Those things are for this topic sers.

@ivangbi can you please check my addy
i read Early Testers and Discord - Gearbox Protocol
and above drive sheets, but cannot find my testers addy 0x74fb529036cB96654E3cF4c18096e7189AC63b3B .
I went through the tutorial and tested other stuff on the platform the tx are on the kovan testnet, opening the credit account (Nov-21-2021 10:25:48 PM +UTC): Kovan Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Etherscan

Please find all the final discussions here.