Totally agree here, minting 100% of the supply and giving it all to hodlers makes no sense, we NEED a DAO and we need a tresuary for funds to drive adoption and sponsor sub projects etc.
Growth is key to becoming THE metaverse currency!
My personal vote is to add 50% to the overall supply for growth and burning the keys to cap the funds afterwards
I like the sentiment of a community/governance controlled DAO.
Instead of new supply I’d say that any derivative projects that want to be recognized by the DAO would require AGLD for certain actions, i.e. imagine AGLD for unbundled, or for a reroll on stats, and the AGLD flows into the DAO.
I’m in favor of minting more AGLD for a treasury to be spent over the next 10 years. And for the max supply to be capped.
there is no reason to airdrop AGLD to mloot holders. mloot holders can buy AGLD from exchanges and dexes.
a 32 million extra mint of AGLD? this would just be a rug pull at this point for AGLD holders. Terrible idea
Agree the AGLD should be supply capped. I also agree that no mLoot holders should absolutely NOT receive any AGLD via airdrop or otherwise.
I disagree that any AGLD should be printed to fund a treasury. Or that any AGLD should be printed at all
Agree. Any dilution of $AGLD would hurt the community.
Basic question, sorry if it was answered elsewhere, but who actually controls AGLD contract right now?
I’ve heard a DAO mentioned, but is that actually live yet, and who are members? AGLD holders, Loot Holders, just original multisigs on the contract?
The initial Loot has become a symbol, similar to a VIP, while the regular loot will be a kind of civilian player.
More mloot is just address data, not more people’s contribution as well as consensus.
It is more important to issue a portion of the AGLD increment as a reward to encourage all new loots who have contributions to join the loot effort. For example more developers, more gamers, more writers. Not a bunch of people who mint a lot of mloot waiting to collect and Dump it.
The notion of building a grants organization to fund projects aligned with the initial enzyme that is the sweet Ethereum LOOT is fine and dandy, but why does there have to be the excuse added in that a grants organization is justified because of this expansion pack mLOOT.
Changing the monetary policy of a token because of a worthy policy goal, advancing ecosystem growth, is not going to scale over time.
Each time there’s a new valid policy aim for the protocol, every person who risked capital has to re-assess the distribution mechanics of the token? That’s nightmares waiting to happen.
Grant DAOs that have thrived and struggled in defi projects like AAVE and SNX emerged in the aftermath of strong product market fit and brand identity. Maybe I’m wrong though, just sharing some thoughts, thanks for having me, all!
Thanks for the thoughtful proposal. Completely agree that we need to both incentivize mLOOT holders to come on board and future proof the LOOT/AGLD project."
To do this, I believe we need to arm the LOOT project with some ammo to fund future LOOT (protocol) development, marketing, BD, etc. – just like a “normal” project would be funded with a token treasury!. The way to do this is to mint a measured amount of tokens to the AGLD treasury and to dedicate them to future protocol growth, including the onboarding of the mLOOT holders and the payment of future contributors to the LOOT ecosystem.
Doing this is hard because we face two hard questions:
This is basically the same question Yearn faced when it did a fair lunch and there were no tokens left to left to pay the dev team. Yearn minted an additional 22% of its outstanding tokens to solve the problem.
*These are the same question any core protocol team faces when it tries to acquire new users – (1) What percent of the treasury should it spend on user acquisition? and (2) How can it use those tokens most effectively?
As Avi wrote, we can answer these questions one at a time.
@Avi_G Can you share more about how you chose a 40% issuance? And do you have any thoughts on vesting those tokens over time?
My strong instinct is that we’d get the most bang for the buck if for “Proposal 1” we vested the tokens linearly across four years 10/10/10/10. This would slow dilution, encourage engagement and align longer term incentives.
For “Proposal 2,” I’d recommend we ONLY award of AGLD tokens to mLOOT holders who actually engage with LOOT, complete onboarding tasks, and acquire “XP.” We could then award each mLOOT holder more AGLD tokens as they “level up” - which effectively transforms “dilutive” awards of AGLD tokens to mLOOT holders into play-to-earn user acquisition rewards.
I’m also curious for feedback. What does everyone think?
It matters quite a bit who is making decisions about allocating $100m worth of token capital, illiquid or otherwise.
The quantity cannot be treated in vacuum with just anyone guiding the ship.
Issuing new token capital out of nothing in the absence of familiarity around incentive structure for capital allocators feels off in a big way.
The point of mLoot was to grow the ecosystem and give access to a larger number of people. mLoot holders should still be eligible for at-least some AGLD which will be good for the entire loot project.
More people = more value.
100% agreed. In fact, if I were a marketer at LOOT, I’d just view the allocation of AGLD to mLOOT holders as a user acquisition cost!
With one caveat. I’d strongly suggest we award any newly minted AGLD tokens to mLOOT holders ONLY when they complete specific engagement tasks, level up and get “XP”!
Example 1:
What this does is transform any AGLD minted for mLOOT holders into a play-to-earn user acquisition device. Sounds like a bullish mint, right? @pleurer @ZKTruth.eth
Noting that separation of gov token and currency token can be achieved by letting OG LOOT holders vote in a AGLD/LOOT DAO using LOOT, AGLD for use for in-game currency only. mLOOT could further be used to signal community sentiment on proposals.
I think thinking about this in terms of user acquisition and developer adoption costs is smart. If everyone just starts hoarding then it will be very hard for the community to grow and any interesting network effects to be established, which is IMO the only thing that’s interesting about this project. The fact that it feels open and interoperable is where the power is, not that the original Loot or AGLD holders suddenly have something artificially scarce and valuable.
Agree, this is very good
It is imperative to the purity of LOOT and all-derivatives that AGLD is not tampered with!
It should be seen as the most precious and rarest of currencies and transacted with subtending currencies via AMM only.
AGLD is FREEDOM in the purest sense.
It should be left to flourish on its own.
BTC Proved Crypto could be Trusted
ETH Proved Crypto could have Function
LOOT is proving Decentralization/Freedom is a Force NOT to be reckoned with…
AGLD is the currency basis of that Force!
Buy screwing with AGLD you effectively debase the currency of the decentralization force that is LOOT.
Dont LOOT our progress by tampering with AGLD,
This proposal makes sense in principle but I think we’re putting the cart before the horse talking about distribution because we do not yet have a clear definition around what AGLD does.
Some questions we should first answer:
Solutions to these questions are paramount to the growth of The Lootiverse.
It could be that AGLD governs capital allocation towards derivative games.
In my unification proposal
I suggested that AGLD should be used to
1 - allocate capital to the development of derivative ganes - games which emulate existing loot structure (OGLoot/MLoot +synth)
2 - allocate capital for in-game treasure (AGDL) to be found/won by future players.
Obviously still needs fleshing out.
DO NOT DEVALUE AGLD…
DO NOT PRINT MORE AGLD…
INSTEAD, ask for AGLD donations from LOOT/AGLD holders to fund the DAO…
This is how you raise funds… not by changing (what is supposed to be an immutable contract)
Request DAO funding from donations
This is greatly accepted
Increases demand/price on AGLD
It lowers available liquidity (FURTHER BOOSTING PRICE AND VALUE)
You DONT print money/coins out of thing air or you devalue the currency just like every GOV in the world does…
ASK FOR DONATIONS!
DONT LOOT AGLD HOLDERS
Please see my other post: AGLD Consolidated Thread - #21 by MassAccept