PoolTogether

Extraordinary Airdrop to Governance Participants

Taking reference to @leighton’s proposal on changing the POOL rewards. There we touched upon the sad fact that the numbers in terms of voting right delegation and number of delegates reaching the 10,000 threshold does not mirror the active and inspiring community that has started to form in particular since the POOL token launch.

All four holders of more than 10,000 votes are only representing themselves (which isnt bad) but still I think that there should also be a representative of several voices. The largest number of votes representing several wallets so far is @0xSiam with 4 token holders represented and only 4,121 votes. I do observe very active governance participants and contribution of really good ideas, so do I notice honest interest and commitment from many people. Therefore, I would propose to implement an extraordinary airdrop, rewarding delegates and users who were willing to take the 20$ gas cost to support PoolTogether governance. This would support reaching the 10,000 voting threshold because the recipients will likely not dump their POOL tokens but hold and further allocate to their trusted delegate. In order to prevent dumping, I propose a timelock of at least 1 month. A gradual drop is perhaps an overkill in light of the numbers and in the same time locking for too long isnt helping getting the numbers in governance up. Ultimately this airdrop will land in safe hands with people who already showed strong commitment by delegating their votes despite high gas costs.

As a number I would propose 255 POOL, representing the daily rewards of the UNI/COMP pools. In connection with the proposed reduction of POOL rewards for liquidity mining, this airdrop would by no means have an inflationary impact nor rob the treasury. At current gas costs I dont expect abuse of this in retrospect and propose that everyone is eligible who is a delegate or did delegate up to and including 2nd March (this is the day the proposal to change POOL award dynamics arose and the airdrop should in any case be “retrospective” but there have been some people who made use of delegating as seen on discord since the gas fees dropped on 2nd March). Maybe someone can dig the number of eligible wallets out but I dont think the number should be very high.


Edit as of 3. March 08:15 CET:

This proposal is a branch of @leighton’s mentioned in the header. I had it in mind when writing and hence didnt think of readers who lack of this context. Therefore I would like to add more color directly here.

The purpose of this airdrop is not to inflate POOL holdings but to tie into the proposal to reduce daily POOL rewards for liquidity mining and add a component that rewards users who do not mine to dump, not mine to hodl but mine to PARTICIPATE. There was a huge burden with gas fees to do so and still many people accepted it without getting anything in return. In the same time, whales mine and dump POOL on the market, obviously having little interest in the long-term development of the protocol.

This is what we discussed in the #governance discord channel and made us shake our heads:

I haven’t yet been able to do detailed analysis on where the claimed POOL from deposit rewards are giong but based on anecdotal evidence whales are simply mining and selling the POOL, such as this whale which [sold ~5,000 POOL tokens for $83,000] (Ethereum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Etherscan ). This is definitely not the intention of the POOL distribution.

Gas fees started to come down on March 1st and this indeed did cause several users to proactively delegate and these should also be captured. Therefore my proposal to take a snapshot end of 2nd March, which is when the idea started and it should in any case not allow for front-running nor abuse. In retrospect, there is little abuse to be expected and the airdrop will certainly land in safu hands.

@Leighton proposes to reduce liquidity mining by 4,080 POOL per day. On Sybil we see less than 250 addresses. Assuming the airdrop is 255 POOL to 250 addresses, thats a total drop of 63,750 POOL. This will support more delegates to reach the 10,000 vote threshold. And this only represents less than 16 days of the current liquidity mining scheme reduction! 16 days of reallocation from dumping whales to active participants. I think this is fair.

14 Likes

I think this is a nice way of targeting active users with POOL that care about governance (as indicated by them paying $20-30 in gas to delegate and receiving “nothing”).
I think it is important that these POOL don’t show up out of thin air though.

If the liquidity mining rewards are lowered, that would allow this airdrop to happen without inflating POOL more than expected.

7 Likes

Would these additional tokens come from? The residual from the reduction proposal on the DAI and USDC pools. It seems a little strange to just generate them out of nowhere. I think the time lock is a little strange as the persons we’re rewarding are the same that have demonstrated a dedication. That being said I support this with or without a time lock.

I support this proposal and don’t think a timelock is necessary.

2 Likes

Yes, @Taliskye I think the tokens should come from what we “save” from reducing the liquidity mining rewards before the first announced 14 weeks end.
We’d have to do the math on if those numbers would approximately even out with the airdrop size @gabor proposed.

2 Likes

Edit: To be clear I am referring to @Torgin method of distribution which mentions using the saved pool from a lowered drip distribution instead of a standard arbitrary amount.

I agree that would be a proper way to allocate remaining pool, to even out the distribution so to speak. The qualifications for this potential drop also seem reasonable as users who have delegated (to themselves or others correct?) are active participants in governance, not just speculative liquidity miners.

I want to stress that we do our best to be fair with this potential drop and to include all addresses thay have delegated within the time frame. Whether they activated themselves or put their votes to others. I’ve seen other communities drops miss eligible wallets with little regard to fix it and it sours the fair voting possibilities!

6 Likes

I would support as long as anyone who spent gas to activate votes get the drop. Also I think a requirement to activate the new dropped votes should be tied to it as part of the claiming process.

4 Likes

You guys are killing me here with all the changes!

PT airdropped me a TON of POOL tokens (and tax burden because I play by the rules :mechanical_arm:). I would literally have to sell half my POOL tokens to cover my obligations, so I haven’t even claimed them yet. Governance farming + vote proposal I disagree with is forcing me to make capital inefficient and risky decisions. I am certainly not alone in this. Why can’t we just have a quiet period where people can make decisions without the rules changing :sob:

I have already seen 2 instances where a whale farmed and later then dumped POOL. I don’t think these people care about the token nor governance and are here to dump on everyone else.

I’m not convinced the whale dumping is an issue personally. There is a notable imbalance in the market that does not seem to be resolving. Since the spike up to 100TLV no more liquidity has came over, but also the APY has remained relatively high.

I guess what I’m trying to get across is the whale dumping hasn’t exactly acted as a disincentive for liquidity to join the protocol so what really is the issue? People can take advantage of the the dumping by buying POOL on the market if they think it is a bad sell by the whale, right? For every whale selling how do you know there’s not 2 whales buying? It certainly seems given the sustained premium that buying in the market is relatively strong. I think the whale dumping is being taken out of context. If they are dumping so what? There is someone buying it that is replacing that liquidity miner that doesn’t care about the protocol with someone who does, right?

Also 2 counter points to the proposal:

1). Think this proposal might have been a bit of a kneejerk to the first proposal participation. Looks like participation has improved considerably since then.

2). I don’t have an issue with rewarding early contributors but there was already an airdrop of 1% for voters in December too wasn’t there? That’s 100,000 POOL given to early voting contributors already. 14% also went to previous users.

1 Like

has this been put to a vote yet at all?

No. The idea of such airdrop is directly linked to a change in the reward rates. The intention is not to do an inflationary drop just for the sake of doing a drop, but to rebalance the current distribution from the treasury to users.

2 Likes

I agree with @ageless and @Uncle here. I’m not against this proposal in principle but I think we just did a pretty extraordinary airdrop by giving 1% of total supply to governance participants and 14% to all users.

We’re only 3 weeks into decentralized governance and it’s probably worth waiting at least a few months to see who stays around and continues to contribute. On top of that, I think the initial issue we had with vote activation and getting delegates up to 10,000 POOL is no longer as active.

I think the risk of doing something like this very early on is it can give an impression that insiders are benefiting and that can drive away people who are new to the community or just getting started. They won’t want to hold POOL if they see that new airdrops are happening often.

6 Likes

Is this live all ready? I mean this 1% to governance participants you refer to ?

No. This thread can also be closed. It was opened at a time when there was little possibility for community members to bring forward governance proposals due to the 10,000 POOL hurdle and the large portion of POOL received by whales. This changed through successful delegation of voting power.

Closing thread per OP request.