GIP-13 Gnosis Protocol Token

[CryptoMatt]

I agree with most of the previous posters that the snapshot should be taken just before this announcement or asap to prevent the system from being manipulated.

The airdrop should certainly include POAP holders who attended the weekly sessions and provided valuable feedback, but also include early users of Cowswap that predate the POAPs. Although I’m sure the team are already taking this into consideration.

[Anna]

@clesaege

How would the price be determined for those?

As a DAO, I don’t think we should give special deal to VC just because they are VCs.
I know that VCs try to push for discounts, but the discount of one is the upmark of the other.
Community members also bring a bunch of services for free (developing projects around it, communicating about the project, acting as early users and testers), often more than VCs.
The Gnosis DAO is well funded therefore not in a position of weakness in front of VCs which would make selling tokens as a discount the only option for survival.
To get a better view of how VC discounts can negatively affect the project, you could follow this withdrawn sushiswap proposal where it was proposed to give VC discounts.

We are very well aware of that, this is the reason that we are giving community members also the chance to invest at the same conditions as VCs. Evaluation, vesting, etc will be the same for everyone. It also says so in the text:

We are aware that there are many community members that contribute to the overall success of Gnosis Protocol and we believe that they should receive the same opportunity as our core investors to invest early in GP. We would therefore airdrop options to our community members that enable them to invest under the same conditions as VCs (same evaluation, same vesting schedule) into our new token.

@clesaege

It’d be good for it to be known in advance such that people (like me with my personal GNO) who are LPing can withdraw them at the snapshot to still get the airdrop.

We are aware of this and ideally find a solution that LP tokens can be equally rewarded. In any case we are not ignoring this

[dunjia.eth]

It goes without saying that the short date should be before you claim to give it out, as there are now more people trying to get airdrops through robo-trading. The total number of people who got poap last time was not very large, and users on both chains should be treated equally.

[dunjia.eth]

On the other hand, I think we could well have taken longer to discuss the airdrop, and of course the snapshot time should have ended with yesterday. This protects the rights of previously active users on the one hand, and also allows us to better work out a solution.

[mhan1985]

This is good news. After reading all the discussions above, everyone’s views on “Retroactive airdrop to early adopters (5%)” are not consistent. Let me talk about my views:

1. First of all, the gas of eth and xdai are different. The interaction cost of early users should be considered as the basis for airdrop. In addition, the number of transactions should be used as an important criterion for judging address qualifications.
2. Poap holders are proof of participation in the activity, but they have no additional contribution compared with early adopters who did not receive poap, and should not be used as a basis for airdrops.
3. As a Retroactive airdrop, the time of the airdrop snapshot should be earlier than this proposal.ating, the time of the airdrop snapshot should be earlier than this proposal.

[claberus]

Thanks @cmagan and @Anna for the excellent proposal!, GPT will be critical for creating network effects.

I think we should be very careful with the initial token allocation. If GPT didn’t exist, most of the benefits and risks to develop Gnosis Protocol would be assumed by Gnosis and GNO token holders. Honouring investors is key for the future capital formation of Gnosis Protocol, so I think we should give GnosisDAO and GNO token holder not less than 30% (instead of the current 15%). I’m pretty sure GnosisDAO will have stronger hands than almost anybody in the community anyway.

I disagree with people asking to cut the airdrop before this GIP-13 post. The airdrop needs to be used to incentivise the current and future activity, not just to give free money to early insiders/ sybil attackers who knew there could be a token. This situation is very common with other less transparent DAOs/Projects and needs to be avoided. @ykplayer8 is right regarding simple airdrops, they incentivise instadumping behaviour.

If early users really believe in Gnosis Protocol and don’t want just free money, they should be buying GNO right now.

[qian]

I highly agree with this proposal. However I wish to express two point about eariler user rewards.

1. The snapshot before Sep 21 2021 11:23:12 (UTC), or before block number 13268831 , is necessary, to keep it fair for the real supporters.
2. There are a lot of Chinese AirDrop hunters already interact with cowswap specifically for AirDrop, they manipulate hundreds even thousands accounts, do a small trade only once, like 100-200USD.
   If those accounts are rewarded with a great value, it will be unfair for the rest of true users.It is recommended that users with a transaction amount of more than $1000 get an empty investment grid
   3.eth users can get more rewards than xDAI. After all, they paid more

Thanks

[zxf]

I agree with the GPI-3,but early users of Cowswap Exchange should be airdroped

[StefanGeorge]

@cmagan

As GnosisDAO will receive by far the largest share of GP Tokens, the vesting period would likely have to be longer than the 4 years that apply to the vesting schedules of the other shareholders.

GnosisDAO might receive the largest share as a single organization but in terms of coordination required within the DAO to use this voting power, it is on a similar level as the core team or external investors, which in total receive a bigger share. This is why I would propose equal vesting schedules among all of them.

[cmagan]

@StefanGeorge

GnosisDAO might receive the largest share as a single organization but in terms of coordination required within the DAO to use this voting power, it is on a similar level as the core team or external investors, which in total receive a bigger share. This is why I would propose equal vesting schedules among all of them.

I think this is definitely a legitimate perspective.
I’m not opposed to equal vesting…
I would love to see some discussion form within GnosisDAO about how to practically use its voting power in other DAOs. Delegating at least part of it among several trusted and aligned community members might be a good initial solution.

[yman]

How do I get an airdrop?

[fleupold]

@claberus

If GPT didn’t exist, most of the benefits and risks to develop Gnosis Protocol would be assumed by Gnosis and GNO token holders. Honouring investors is key for the future capital formation of Gnosis Protocol, so I think we should give GnosisDAO and GNO token holder not less than 30% (instead of the current 15%).

This is true. However, having a single entity owning such a large share makes it very unattractive to investors that actually want to be active and influence the project (even 15% is a stretch). I think our experience with Gnosis shows that the absence of such active external parties that are involved in strategic and governance decision have made it harder to build a product that finds fit and can compete in this extremely hard space.

I personally think that the overall chance of GPT succeeding is > 2x higher with a 15% GNO share compared to a 30% share.

[MarcinSPro]

i love CowSwap:) i cant wait for governence

[StefanGeorge]

@claberus

I think we should give GnosisDAO and GNO token holder not less than 30% (instead of the current 15%). I’m pretty sure GnosisDAO will have stronger hands than almost anybody in the community anyway.

Looking at the initial token distribution about 15%-20% of the 48% allocated tokens (airdrops + team + investment round + GnosisDAO) are given to GNO token holders. This is 31% to 42% of the initial distribution and a fair share in my view.

[xelotpyrc]

Hey guys, I really love the idea of a community governed Gnosis Protocol. But with regard to the buy back option in the Token Supply section you implicitly reveal that you want to issue a transferable GPT. In light of the current regulatory pressure from different enforcement agencies I would suggest that we as the GnosisDAO are issuing a non-transferable token. Whether or how the GP DAO will change the token functionality at a later date, and how the GnosisDAO will coordinate with its tokens on this issue, should only concern us at a time when this issue becomes relevant. However, currently the regulatory climate is so hot that I would vote against a transferable token.

[robertwilliams.eth]

POAPs shouldn’t matter. there are plenty of early users who effectively did testing several times, but didn’t have time to do the POAP events.

[yarmalenko]

POAP events are important for the testing of the protocol. You used COWswap to your benefit but those people did the swaps to help the COWswap team test the new changes. They spent hundreds on gas fees and did trades that are not really benifical to them only to be present on the test and help the team build better products.
So those who have taken the time every week and done trades for the test should get the more percentage. It’s only fair to them!

[Starry]

Finally come out! Totally agree this proposal.
Early suporters before July even June, POAP active testers, they should be considered to get more airdrops.

[Zen_Dragon]

I personally agree with this initial proposal and and am a fan of the way the distribution is structured. I am a fan of the utilities mentioned of the token and feel we have a very unique product here so this is exciting for everyone. I trust the team will hash out the banter between xDai and ETH users in a fair and organized fashion while hearing out the community for a vote of some kind.

I would like to open a discussion regarding Liquidity providers as many GNO holders have placed their tokens in Uniswap, Balancer, other AMMs, and various other pools across the Ethereum Netwrok and Arbitrum (possibly others). Will a deadline be announced for when to remove these tokens and place them into the locking mechanism? Also will the full value, or only the % of the pool value be eligible based on a snapshot? A few things I would like answers too and have seen via this forum and discord many others are wondering as well. I support the pool % split route personally but want to hear various opinions on this.

Excited for more discussion on everything GPv2. Great work on this Gnosis / CowSwap teams.

[Confucian]

I would be your honest fan, just go !