You underestimate adhd people with time blindness, aka me 
Regardless, as long as all the info is clearly stated in multiple channels with a generous timeframe in advance of the claim window, I canāt really argue with that.
3 Likes
Hi frens,
I believe it is a bad precedent to backtrack on a proposal that received community votes like this. It is unfortunate that the original plan seemingly hasnāt proved to be what the project needs now, but reneging is untenable IMO.
We have built trust by being transparent and prioritising decentralised governance. Breaking trust happens in an instant, building it takes time.
I would hope that as the project continues to deliver on impressive partnerships and activations, and as it donates more and more money to IRL causes, that our reputation in the space will grow.
If we need to front a significant amount to get listed somewhere, I donāt think thatās worth it.
As the scams in the space are revealed and destroyed, we will rise to the top. As the provenance narrative gains traction, in crypto and the broader market, we will rise to the top.
CEXs should see the value in having our project on their exchange, and they should front the cash to host us and secure MMs. If they donāt want to, that demonstrated their priorities, and would signify to me that we donāt want to do business with them until they change their minds.
I appreciate Pathās nuanced thoughts.
If this proposed amendment to the previously passed proposal does end up going ahead, I would be in favour of Pathās options A, B or C. I would choose B for selfish reasons, as a holder. I would choose C under duress, but donāt believe it is necessary. I would choose A over the rest because we should honour what we said weād do.
I would not choose D. I donāt trust that giving OTD full discretion over the funds is the best way forward for this projectās ethos.
Slight sidebar: I would like to see more transparency from the OTD treasury. Iād like to know current team members wages for their engagement, and for the community to have more power in rewarding/supporting select members/projects/activations over others. Having worked closely with the OTD team, as a Copywriter and Project Manager, from just after the projectās inception, I know that the team is full of hardworking individuals. I have also seen resources and efforts go to waste and I would like for the community to better assess the effectiveness of the treasuryās spend. I appreciate certain deals might require some confidentiality, and perhaps not everything can be viewed on-chain, but Iād like for those hidden costs to be minimised and for more of the current costs to be made visible.
I am strongly in favour of getting a constitution ratified immediately.
3 Likes
i think itās a bit of a misconception that tier one listings just happen w/o market makers and conversations - hasnāt been the situation from my experience
will consider a longer claim window
2 Likes
ty for your comment
i disagree with the general arguments here that plans canāt change
plans, especially in crypto, very often need to change
and, if this goes ahead, this is a proposal that would be voted on by community - so end of the day the DAO decides best path forward just like before
happy to discuss listings in depth - legally i canāt share everything here, so thatās been difficult
also, re: D - we are in this position bc we didnāt earmark enough of a flex fund before, so def possible we will need to modify things from time to time if there are situations that must be addressed by council/team - we must be adaptable with the community as a whole at the forefront (yes, many different opinions here, so itās not an easy or quick job to be sure)
re: sidebar - removing all autonomy of the team/council is where DAOs often go to die. the council/team spends infinite time on governance while lacking time to do prioritized work. iāve seen it happen in internally in Pleasr and other DAOs. the dream of decentralization is a noble one, but it takes leadership and a lot of unseen, unrecognized hard work to get there. we just donāt have the autonomous tooling in place to make it happen with a human-centric, non-protocol project at this point, which is why the council tries its best to gather opinions, combine them with years of knowledge from working on the project, and take the best path forward. impossible to please everyone unfortunately, but it is possible to have the discourse, which is what matters.
2 Likes
also, iād add i think listings are #1 request from the greater community
4 Likes
also want to drop the original proposal here for more context: Supply Redistribution Plan
as well as our updated āyellowā paper w/ more on the mission and structure of the DAO:
3 Likes
Dear OTD team,
Itās been a pleasure to watch the much real and very meaningful work you continue to do. You are truly the custodians and stewards and I continue to happily and proudly Own The Doge.
Re-considering and changing the original redistribution plans is a very complex question. As we can see from replies and discussions here, it leads to the question of constitution. Whatever the final outcome for this proposal/re-adjustment, going through this process and testing peopleās thoughts, beliefs, and alignment, is all for the better.
After having the chance to read everyoneās input, I have to agree with Path.
Providing the constitution is a #1 priority, and we find a good way to reserve/lock unclaimed tokens for only mm for a period, is a compromise I would likely support.
Itās that, or sticking to the original plan.
Having said that, i am very much looking forward to the next stages of the discussion!
4 Likes
in my passive observation, iād second this assessment
3 Likes
What will we do after this is done?
"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"
Weāve used community tokens to fund projects in the past. ā
Whatās our plan to avoid DOGās token either stagnating or deflating?
In a sense I guess we could say that the redistributions have added an inflationary trading pressure - the interest and awareness of the token existence also increased but the web3 attention span sadly remains super low.
I would say that the general awareness of the existence of us has increased the past 6-9 months where the last 6 of them has really begun showing a shift in activity.
Most other projects merely focus on memology and reduce the value of the underlying tech to representing nothing more than a virtual stock exchange, casino or some new pumpānādump scheme, confidence fraud (celeb tokens) or else a lot of projects face overpromising tech-broās who essentially self fund their tech nomadery by use of short Scrum Sprints to create plugins for some infrastructure coin which will increase āthis or that by that or thisā.
To start my series of questions and random thoughts I would like to ask how we later will funnel what our partnership generate to fund new projects redistributing the inherent value of these projects and what they aim to achieve to token holders/(perhaps even stakers?) and LP:s?
Could we perhaps in addition to LP mining do some form of perhaps theme based āintention stakingā in which the community could get the influence over where the partnership funnel aims its gains? If so I suggest that this āintention stakingā would give the staker tokens which would allow for the possibility to lay and change an active standing vote towards what percentage of the partnership funnel gets distributed to what intentions.
The council and community vote for introductions of themes at certain pre-defined moments. New themes can be suggested to be introduced by the council.
With this system, we get something which could represent a type of active governance token which requires you to lock your $DOG, and with that your intention in a sense, if its your wish is to influence the aims of the DAO long-term instead of merely trading.
A type of non-liquid hierarchically structured influence staking mechanism, hope Iām making some sense here.
To describe it further I suggest it would represent a type of bond-like staking mechanism which could be weighed in a way which makes the one who stakes tokens for a set durations gets access to these tokens. Locking ones tokens for like 3 months would f.ex result in receiving a 1:1 ratio of tokens whilst every extra 3 months increases this ratio by .25 meaning that a 6 month lock gives a 1:1,25 ratio these tokens to vote with, 9 months lock 1:1,50 and so on.
This could give us two new approaches which both rewards ones who contribute with stability to the token overall, via conviction, by means of this type of bond-like staking mechanics whilst also rewarding the ones who the DAO has been talking about in regards to a type of LP mining protocol via the other mechanism that has been discussed.
In other words: Longer staked dedication/interest = more influence over trajectory via means of influencing DAO:s focus essentially making the staker a true stakeholder which also means the holders would get directly connected to the DAO:s well being and progression over longer timespans.
The relocation of the intent of what these votes wants the project to focus its efforts towards could be represented in perhaps a non-tradable but as mentioned interactively usable token that the staker receives.
The liquidation of these tokens occurs in accordance with the staking contract, they get automatically rendered moot and a repayment of the original $DOG tokens which were staked get redistributed to the staker.
I would say that it furthermore is important that these stakers get rewarded for both their trust and their commitment somehow. It should mean something very significant to be an active holder of these tokens, more than via the influence they would give.
What Iām trying to get at here in a sense is the question of maintaining the DAO:s sustainability and via that sustain value within it - from both an economic standpoint but also from making sure we maintain a shared vision via community influence.
Would be interesting to hear more about what weāre doing in this area both now and how we envision that weāll steer correctly maintaining something like this over time.
Iām also wondering about how our tokenomics interact with general non-cryptological reality ā might be worth discussing and sharing with the DAO.
Another worry is how much of the total token weāll later see existing in dead, non-recoverable, indirectly burned wallets.
Sorry for any inconsistencies in the post, been writing it on and off last 2 days and checked it a few times over for misstakes before posting.
2 Likes
love your complex mind. will digest this for this proposal and the future.
2 Likes
i want to thank everyone that provided thoughts here <3
i know these proposals are complex and itās hard to give the total picture in a digestible format. thereās obviously a team of people working on these problems daily, analyzing them, and trying to find solutions months before anything like this comes to the entire DAO.
we care about the dialogue and are considering all options to solve for earmarking funds in DOG specifically for future listings. this has been by far the number one request from the community, so we have been taking it seriously. it also provides accessibility to people owning the doge at a greater scale. thatās the problem we are trying to solve.
weāll have another council call early this week to discuss and then will share next steps.
thank you again for your extra commitment of time in making Doge a force for good in the world.
7 Likes
gm all,
Sorry for chiming in so late but overall, this proposal is something I stand behind. A constitution defining powers of the DAO is something we have been working on, and will definitely accelerate. I am not a fan of going back and reversing agreed upon proposals, especially something which helped in getting the DAO where it is at now.
But imagining a situation where we miss out on an essential listing opportunity just because we didnāt have enough DOG in the treasury is something which I think will do injustice to the holders. We want listings to come organically, that is what we have been and will work towards, but having a little provision is a good safety net to ensure our and our communityās work pays off. I personally would like to see DOG on tier 1s, accessible to the broader audience, standing true to our rally cry āeveryone will own the dogeā.
Getting the Dope IP has been ground breaking for us- something which came after the originally agreed plan and requires careful stewardship. Atsuko trusted OTD with the most valuable IP in this trillion dollar crypto economy, we would want to do justice to this and thereby ensure longer runway, broader outreach and I feel market making will help in some of this.
I appreciate and highly acknowledge the discourse above. It provides me with a better insight and a broader perspective. I am aligned with what Path has said above and feel option C is something I will stand behind. Lets keep forwarding Doge culture and flip the Mona Lisa!
Do Only Good Everyday
Shubh
3 Likes
It also has to increase focus on building community tenfold. Thatās where we get our inherent growth, thatās what strengthens the core.
after another in-depth discussion, myself and council is in alignment to hold off on a snapshot proposing any changes to the original tokenomics plan
instead - weād like to open a new discussion post to allow all community members to provide ideas on how to solve for listings - one of the most requested items to the project team
as head of tokenomics, path will spin one up in the coming days as we discuss how best to frame the challenge/opportunity, but just wanted to drop a short update here
ty for all your feedback, we very carefully consider it every time its given with the goal of driving the project and our community forward
do only good <3
6 Likes
great stuff, tri - thanks for listening to our feedback.
2 Likes
I feel that what the leader said did not make our community members understand. Was the snapshot taken last month invalidated? Has the 11% supply reallocation in the third quarter been cancelled? I think the leader should speak more clearly.
1 Like
nothing from the original plan is changing
1 Like
much love my dog - im glad we had some time to discuss this topic
1 Like
100% can also confirm that this is one of the topics that we hear constantly being requested from community
2 Likes