Proposal Update: DOG Treasury Plan Earmarks

[tridog]

Gm Doges - Tridog here, your friendly chief dog.

Whew, a lot has happened in the past 12 months. We saw the bull market come back (I think), we brought the Doge DAO complete Dogependance from Pleasr, we worked with Atusko Sato to recharge the Doge IP, signed with a top Hollywood documentary producer for the Doge Doc, put Doge Day into the National Calendar, and we brought on Path to rework DOG tokenomics. Also, stay tuned for a broken Guiness World Record on November 2 at Doge Day this year

I’m jumping into the proposals now to suggest a little update to our current tokenomics plan in order to keep the team building and the project progressing over the next few years and beyond.

Over a year ago when we initially created the plan with Path we underestimated the amount of DOG we should hold in the DAO treasury (ownthedoge.eth) in an effort to be overly generous to our current holders and scale the community.

Which we did. We gave away and locked the majority of the DOG supply and grew the community from 20,000 holders to over 1,100,000 cross-chain holders.

This is what the supply looked like before:

• PleasrDAO - 45%
• Community LP - 5%
• Community DAO - 22%
• Individual holders - 28%

Pleasr moved 20% into LP positions, some of which has been sold into the open market. They locked 10% for 4 years. The remaining 15% was sent to the community DAO.

This means we had 37%

• 6% was used to increase LPs
• 5% was dropped on Base
• 3% has been deployed or earmarked for grants and bonuses
• 2% was given to Atsuko
• 3% has been sold OTC

We still hold about 18%

• 11% is for the proportional redistribution airdrop that has been planned
• 2% more can be sold OTC to build more USDC stability in the treasury
• 5% is still available for additional airdrops
• .5% for grants

The plan was to bring the DAO treasury down to zero minus the above allocations, but given how much has changed in the last year, there is a more efficient use of tokens for active holders for things like future listings and market making that might need a substantial amount of DOG to drive the project and token forward.

As a team and project we want to continue to be the key driver in Doge culture and public goods. Like the art, statue, film, space, and hundreds of other projects, we’ve been the main leader in Doge cultural over the past 3 years and want to continue keeping Doge relevant and exciting into the next 3 years, the next decade (making the Doge story over 30 years long), and hopefully much longer.

So how do we do that?

1. We will continue to follow the tokenomics plan to acquire USDC from OTC to build our runway to 3 years.

2. We will prioritize crypto partnerships and brand licensing with the Doge IP in order to drive Doge culture and sustainability in the DAO.

3. The 11% proportional redistribution airdrop will go as promised. However, if there are any unclaimed tokens due to inactive holders from the redistribution, we will earmark them for very important projects like listings and market making.

If you have any questions, please chime in below. It’s been a wild ride with Doge and we want to see it continue for decades more into the future becoming the longest lived modern meme movement.

If we do our jobs right as a DAO, we will not only continue to keep Doge relevant, but we will keep Doge as a force for good in the world. Doge will continue to spread joy and happiness in her silly yellow dog way by being seen. Doge will continue supporting dogs and kids through incredible nonprofits like Save The Children and animal rescue shelters. And if the DAO continues to be successful, this will fuel even more of this work by both us and Atsuko with our support. A true win-win-win for not just our community, or crypto, but the world. Real world impact that scales with us. Now let’s get to it.

Do only good,

Tridog

References

Supply Redistribution Plan

With agreement from PleasrDAO, we can propose a final token allocation schedule. Please note that all percentages are approximate at time of writing and may slightly differ when it comes to execution. The current supply looks something like this: PleasrDAO - 45% Community LP - 5% Community DAO - 22% Individual holders - 28% When DOG was created, PleasrDAO owned 100% of the supply. This is a difficult position to fairly remove yourself from. They have recently transferred the LP to the com…

Yellowpaper

[boop]

Our Own The Doge team has accomplished so much this past year, with even more exciting things on the horizon! I fully support the idea of reallocating funds so we can keep pushing Doge to new heights and continue our mission.

We’ve always been generous in rewarding our community and holders, so it makes perfect sense to reallocate any unclaimed tokens to better serve the needs of our community and carry on with our dogely journey.

You have my support! In doge we trust

Boop

[Zzzzz]

Considering the present market conditions, community demand & prospect of Doge as universal meme of kabosu. It’s an aligned decision to focus on exchange listing & bringing more users into the ecosystem. I support this proposal. Everyone will Own The Doge

[meta_rach]

I don’t know what most of this means boss, but keep up the amazing work! In DOGE We Trust

[Smoke]

I agree with this above, active members should be rewarded across the board and the tokens remaining should go to activations that facilitate growth, ease of trading or token security including listings, market making, LP or essential legal

[ATLAS]

I support this Proposal Tri❤️…

And I also want to say that this is just the beginning. With the collective power of our community, we’re set to take Doge to new heights. Let’s keep pushing forward and doing only good everyday

Atlas😍

[dres]

Gm All,

Congratulations on the incredible execution thus far. As an investor in $DOG, it has been a masterclass to watch the restructuring take place over the last 12-18mo.

Regarding the above proposal of the token redistribution and unclaimed tokens, I think any ‘Clawback’ will have material adverse affects and we should not move forward with this plan.

I personally took this negatively and believe is a slippery slope from a Leadership / Governance lens. OTD was exceptional in their transparency wrt the initial redistribution plan as well as the multiple airdrops. I believe productive capital remained in the system bc of your transparency and I would consider this to be ‘active holders’. To clawback / roll-back holders for not opting-in to their airdrop as stated by Leadership, one can legitimately question what else could be taken away or reneged in the future. IMO, by default, an investor has opted-in because they are holders and have put their capital to work in your system.

I would stress that if OTD needs capital for market making, CEX listings, etc, that there is a cleaner, more aligned way and would be happy to share ideas. However, an ambiguous roll-back would be against the OTD values as I know them and would hurt the organization. I’ve unfortunately seen this play out and the repercussions were a disaster. No matter how transparent and vocal you think you will be, there will be very unhappy holders who will publicly confront the organization.

Thanks,
dres

[Vandy]

Hi everyone! few thoughts:

• I think that everyone should get the airdrop regardless of claim. It was part of the plan from over a year ago so I think we stick with our word.
• The OTD team is wonderful, so having the OTD team get the unclaimed coins would be awesome. BUT, the only thing that it could be used for is a CEX listing as the team should not and will not sell these coins to pay people. I think onchain activity is up only, and with enough success, CEX listing is inevitable. Also, CEX listing does not necessarily mean price goes up.
• I am strongly against unclaimed coins going back to large holders or people who claimed. Adds much more sell pressure and still takes away from the people who did not claim. Net negative all around imo. Airdrop is already huge.

OTD is one of the best teams Ive ever seen operate, keep killin it. Cheers.

[path]

Hey everyone. This is a very important issue to me, and as both a team member and large investor I hope I am able to understand both sides of this as best as possible.

The team’s work done this year has been groundbreaking and well directed. We have a very promising future for both the brand and our token’s ecosystem, and we have really seen the potential our idea has - since last year’s proposal, OTD has dramatically improved in every imaginable metric, including runway.

The team was allocated a % of the supply to sell OTC, in order to raise liquid capital (the notional amounts of our internal operations are not published, but can be tracked on-chain). This has been processed at a steady rate and has so far raised about 2 years of runway, of which we have 16 months left. If fully completed we will be able to reach about 3 years of runway, from the date of the proposal. This was, at the time, deemed to be ample runway to build out the revenue from other sources in the project to the point of it being self-sustaining. We have since come into ownership of the Doge IP, something extremely culturally important that requires careful stewardship. OTD has existed for about 3 years now, but because of its previous relationship with PleasrDAO, was not necessarily set up to be self-sustaining to begin with. We may be disappointed with the amount of liquid capital OTD was given to run itself - but this does not give us the right to gut community allocations. I am determined not to return to the previous model which saw OTD continuously dump DOG into the market to fund itself.

United fronts are strong foundations. I had originally written something else here but I will be more concise: It baffles me that there was any assumption that the community would take this in good faith; this relationship, and the reputation of OTD, is too vital to push compromises with.

It is important, as this is a community DAO with a focus on decentralisation, that the community feels appropriately in control of their treasury and operations. At the same time, the team must be able to work efficiently. There are nuances and ambiguities because we never ratified a constitution. I think drawing solid boundaries is an immediate requirement for this organisation and I will be submitting a draft this coming week.

While there were many factors at play, the restructuring of the supply distribution was a major overhaul that revived the project. It restored community confidence in its operations and fairness. This is what allowed OTD to raise the amount of money it did. The existing structure would likely be in hibernation without it. Any reversal of this proposal is a failure to reciprocate the community’s support. The community should not be expected to support moving goalposts, especially considering the previous tokenomics system.

That does not mean this proposal cannot be taken in a successful direction. We can frame the claim window idea, with the reclaimed DOG going ONLY to listings/MM, to be the most beneficial for active holders. They would still get their expected airdrop amount, and would also get any benefits of listings that require large amounts of tokens. This is very aggressive and does not care for inactive holders.

It is also possible that no changes are necessary. If the price of DOG increases enough before the end of our runway, the OTC allocation could meet both the liquid requirements for runway and listing fees. Moreover, it is absolutely possible to be listed without paying for anything. We may not have to act at all!

A combination of the above reasoning would be to vote in agreement with reclaiming tokens, but only for use with listings, with the caveat that a proper constitution be put in place; with the future ability for the community to redistribute any of the unclaimed DOG back to their intended recipients should the additional amount not be needed by whatever future point is is deemed appropriate. I implore that this is the best way forward without fracturing the DAO.

Below I attach my original writeup for what would consist of the snapshot voting options.

DOG Treasury Plan Earmarks

OTD is redistributing 11% of the supply to its holders. The snapshot was taken on August 30th. All eligible EVM wallets will have 90 days to claim a stream of DOG, which will vest linearly over the course of a year. Solana balances will be handled separately.

OTD proposes reclaiming any unclaimed DOG at the end of this 90 day period. However, using the DOG for anything other than redistribution would be outside of the originally agreed proposal. So, we are creating another proposal to decide on what course of action should be taken.

These are the proposed options:

A: No reclaiming should be allowed. The redistribution should continue without a limited claim window, and all remaining DOG should be left for any future claimants.

B: The remaining DOG can be reclaimed after 90 days, but must still be used for proportionally redistributing to the community.

C: The remaining DOG can be reclaimed after 90 days, but must be used specifically for listing and market making opportunities.

D: The remaining DOG can be reclaimed after 90 days, and can be used to the full discretion of OTD.

Thank you for reading all of this. If you made it this far, please please please leave your feedback below. There is still time to consider alternatives and voice concerns in an honest attempt to discover the best route to success. I believe the team, our provenance and our relationships have absolutely unparalleled potential, which is why I continue to be heavily invested and passionate about this project.

Sincerely,
Path

[UltronMKII]

I would very respectfully agree with what Dres and Vandy laid out above. I think we made a commitment to distribute 11% of the supply to holders, and we should honor that commitment in full. The only thing I would add is that if a change is to be made, it should keep as close to that original promise as possible, which to me would mean redistributing the unclaimed tokens back to those who had claimed. We could potentially do this via a second stream with the same terms but with the addition of a one-year cliff.

The OTD team has done an incredible job and I’ve never been more excited to Own the Doge. Cheers frens.

[tridog]

ty for your thoughts, V - im aligned with this

[tridog]

ty for the feedback - let’s talk through other possibilities this week so we have every solution on the table

[tridog]

“The art of life is a constant readjustment to our surroundings.” – Kakuzo Okakura

[Smoke]

I agree with Path’s position above as a solid compromise (MM & listings only for remaining balance)

We are working with Hedgey to build a custom claim dashboard, all holders would have 90 days to simply click “claim” and that will entitle them to the entire stream, ofc all that keep up with us at any capacity will receive their allotment

Regarding the constitution, I worked on it for some time (4-5 months) with previous team members and due to a decision making matrix that caused a lot of debate it was sidelined

I think It’s a great time for us to revisit and finalize it

[adrianandreev]

I am a noob small fry/fish in this so please take it as a grain of salt, I choose the D.)

Thanks for your hard work & stewardship

[LouisXXII]

Thank you, Path and the entire OTD team for all the hard work!

Community trust and transparency remain the guiding principles of success in our ecosystem. As per Ultron’s post, I also believe we should honor the original commitment to redistribute 11% of the supply to holders and act as close as possible to redistributing unclaimed tokens back to those who had claimed.

With the incredible progress the OTD team has made and the strategic partnerships you’ve established, i’m confident that listings will happen organically, without the need for additional costs. I Believe in the new revenue stream approach you guys already put in place, to use IP and sponsorings. I am impressed by latest Revolut partnership which pave the way for many other similar actions and as Path said, “requires careful stewardship”. I’m far to be a marketing or other field expert, but I believe in the community based decision making.

Again, much respect to OTD for everything you achieved so far. Its exciting to see such a talented and complementary team building a promising future. Ultra bullish!

[meta_rach]

Thank you everyone for leaving insightful feedback because it honestly helped me understand more.

I don’t feel very qualified to chime in on any type of financial matrix, so I’m just commenting for myself and anyone else without a big brain in tokenomics…

I’m obviously vested not only financially, but also with time. Diverting from an original plan makes sense as far as technology evolves, but the original ethos needs to stay intact for everyone, regardless the cycle and amount they invested in and stayed.

My issue with a claim period and “inactive” holders is due to the definition of wallets that have simply held without claiming tokens within the allotted time period. I’m an extremely absent-minded person. I invested my son when he was 15, and i would never expect him to remember even now, three years later.

To be penalized or miss out due to distraction/awareness/life and because you’re not consumed with the amount your investment is worth, seems almost like the antithesis of what it means to own the doge. “Inactive” holders are the bedrock of long-term investors.

This space changes rapidly, and I think it’s important to recognize the bubble we’re in and how we’re easily able to stay on top of information…but for others, it could be lost on them despite being supporters.

I completely agree the daoge should utilize some type of mechanic to reallocate funds, but not the way in describing inactive accounts. If anything, or if it’s even possible, airdropped tokens for this should have a burn/redeem with predetermined percentages that go directly to the treasury for short-term “active” accounts vs. “inactive” hodlers. Set an incentivizing, automatic redeem period to hold for 90 days, and a percentage-based block period for short-term traders.

I don’t even know if that makes sense, but for me, who’s attention is yanked in different directions 69 times a day…a 3-month period could be the same as a week or a year.

[tridog]

i think claim period is standard and generous in this scenario - 90 days is the long end of an industry average 1-3 months for airdrop claims

[tridog]

ty for your feedback

[Chocorado]

I’d also like to see a longer claim window, to lower the threshold for activity level so it makes it back to more of the long term holders who might just be going through periods of market / web3 hibernation, or bouts of inactivity in other words.

If a $DOG holder is active enough to figure out how to claim this, within an extremely generous timeframe, like 6 months, and there’s pinned posts on the socials for the duration of the claim period that clearly describe how / where to do it, then I think that’d be fine.

If anything, allocate the unclaimed tokens to market making, listings (I believe listings will naturally happen too but it would be nice to speed that process along), and more OTC - then we can put some of that additional OTC revenue toward team bonuses in the form of $USDC, not $DOG.

To summarize, I support:

• Longer claim window
• Market making
• Listing fees
• More OTC
• Team bonuses

…but ultimately I’m fine with any combination of them that won’t create any unnecessary sell pressure