Disagree, users have the right to deal with their tokens.
And the market should be free, you know nothing about the market.
Actually, users sell their tokens now, but a lot of them will buy back, if the price go higher and higher, or anyway, the market will give a reasonable price of OP.
Don’t allow users to sell, just mean no new comer will join in the ecosystem, very stupid empty talk.
3 Likes
Totally agree with you. I was already thinking of this.
Yes it is true but community must not be disloyal and they think about themselves not Project
The ones who provided liquidity must not be considered as sellers
1 Like
Totally against it. We need do it before airdrop or don’t do it at all. As has already been said - if you want a hold - do vesting.
I hold OP in my wallet.
This is blockchain and decentralization.
Tokens should change hands. The point of governance is that everyone can become a participant in the project. And you propose to immediately exclude permanently some of the users. And what about the new users? Maybe then those who bought on the exchange yesterday and today to give additional privileges? This is the worst idea.
For future drops - let the liquidity mining be.
3 Likes
I honestly can’t see any reason for this proposal, other than maybe OP is annoyed he didn’t sell at market top or a bit of game theory to maybe secure a greater percentage of future airdrops for himself.
Punishing those who sold doesn’t help those who are working for the ecosystem.
Selling creates a market between people that don’t want to govern and people who do want to govern. People that want to govern more get to buy tokens from those that don’t want to govern.
Bullying people to delegate doesn’t form a community.
Isn’t it reasonable to play the market, sell at top to buy back in at bottom for those that really want to govern? Not every dumpooor is equal…
Black listing half the community is not a good start to forming a community.
2 Likes
My suggestion is to look into (big?) accounts who claimed the tokens before the official start of claiming, or did any similar malicious behavior.
I don’t think it is reasonable to use the “official” start of the claiming as a measure of malice. The airdrop URL was made public on github, shared on discord, and when I went to it the airdrop was functional. This ended up being during the short window of testing, and it was (sort of) disabled shortly after.
There was no indication that the airdrop was “not live” yet, and, frankly, that wouldn’t matter anyway. The airdrop was live, intentional or otherwise. If the team had an official start in mind, it was their responsibility to prevent anyone from claiming prior to that start time.
1 Like
agreed with pleasure
I did, no response form them.
we have 2 types of sellers
-
- sell all amount
-
- sell some of his amount
► to much seller 2.A type
- is poor user who sell because his portfolio is maybe lower than his airdrop ( many user from india/africa/middle america) is not very god idea delisting this type user from next airdrop if they not sell more than 75/50/30??? %
if this user stay on the network with 50%(30/75 ? idk) of amount airdrop is trustworthy and contributing into decentralization network
► im not from poor country btw, we need find good ration between hold/sell 25/50/75/ % ???
▼ some people who dont sell waiting for next airdrop because they want more usd than they geted
( maybe pople from rich country can risk it )
I sold all my OP day 1. I will still be going to use optimism via SNX staking, LYRA pools, perp protocol and excited for coming VELO.
This proposal infact will do more harm than good to protocol. Look at any airdrop. Really doesnt make sense to keep holding them and not sell.
That is unfortunately highly unlikely since their allocations are already calculated and airdrop is about to be live.
I disagree. Tax issue may become obvious only after claiming. What’s more this money may be a big difference to someone from low-income countries.
If the airdrop was not meant to be dumpable, then they should have designed it with a vesting period like other airdrops e.g. NODE from dappnode.
3 Likes
I don’t think anyone benefits here from slashing OP users future airdrops, these tokens were given to them to do as they please. they are simply selling their responsibility to people who want to contribute to the network. Besides these users could actually buy back the OP they sold. Really would just be a bad idea to do this. Maybe focusing more on sybils would be more beneficial.
1 Like
IMHO: you can rewards holders with some NFT or something… But punish for selling airdrop - nonsense.
If tokens was suppossed to be hold, why so many listings…? Just lock the drop, or make vesting… No one broke the rules. You just try to make a new rules right now.
You can reward holders with some NFT or something else … but don’t punish for sale of AirDrop
There’s already a lot of heavy debate in this thread so I’m reluctant to add another take but I do think the correct approach is likely a balanced one, similar to what @polynya suggested above.
On the one hand, it does feel unpleasant to those that hold through good times and bad to see others immediately sell off. On the other, there are plenty of legitimate reasons someone might need to sell off and, as others have mentioned, there are many ways that they could still be invested in the success of the project beyond just holding their initial tokens.
The bonus multiplier approach for those who claimed / delegated without selling seems to strike a good balance here, but honestly depending on the amount of effort required I wouldn’t necessarily over-index on it. I know from Gitcoin’s airdrop that many people spent weeks debating how the drop could have been tweaked or improved and in my opinion it took valuable time away from building out the product and pushing forward the mission (again if it’s an easy change that might be different).
5 Likes
What kind of swoon wrote this game, they themselves handed out 30k coins in the equivalent of $50k and are surprised that they were leaked by the second transaction, did they drop Elon Musk ??? 99.99% of people will merge onto the planet when they see such numbers))) then give out $100 each and don’t whine, although with such a start of the stigma I would have leaked it for $100 
the ones who sold the token before the official announcement and the ones who claim the token through smart contract should definitely remove for the next rounds of airdrop
they dumped the token and didn’t allow the market makers to begin providing liquidity in the right way.
可以折中一点，虽然这样效果可能会好，但是并不认为这是个最优的方案！
1 Like