Users who sold the initial OP airdrop should become ineligible for all future airdrops

I can’t say I agree. If we ban future airdrops to those that sell, we will have people who hold to get the next airdrop. Eventually, they will dump when there are no longer any airdrops.

Also, we don’t always know why people sell, they may need liquidity.

Banning people from all airdrops for selling once may be a bit extreme. It will also concentrate the distribution of the next airdrop which is not ideal as well.

The way I look at it is if they sell, then it’s an opportunity for those that want to be a part of the collective to buy.

Instead of focusing on banning people that sold, focus on those that held or bought OP. Come up with a structured proposal for holders.

Lastly, this post should of started in the ideas section. This is not a proposal. It lacks structure and concrete guidelines. Before creating a proposal submit it to the ideas section to flush out the idea.

2 Likes

Totally agreed with you

Totally agree with you

Totally agreed for contribute strong OP ecosystem

@ and what do you think about slashing future %'s of airdrops for initial sellers like this?

Try to reward certain behaviors rather than punish certain behaviors. For example, the reward holds 1000 $ops or 10000 $ops. Instead of banning sales.

Disagree about disqualify those who sold but should be reward for those who “didnt transfer or sold” !

you’re right, but let’s notice that in most of the chains, the airdrop raises questions, maybe by discussing it here and there we will end up finding a methodology that will be beneficial for the whole ecosystem. Even if it is futile for here, I think it is healthy for the whole crypto universe.

I agree with you, This is a great idea.100% . im waiting for stake op <3

someone like me claimed OP and transfered to hardware wallet what about them??:thinking::thinking:

I agree, the people that selling their drop should not be able to have access to future drops

If your intention is to sell the token eventually, it doesn’t matter if you sell it now or 3 months later, you are intended to sell it. Let’s face it, the majority of the people just want more tokens. Will they REALLY participate in governance? If the token becomes non-transferable(or goes to zero), I’m sure all of a sudden they would find governance not interesting anymore. This proposal is like introducing staking without actually saying it.

Personally, I think we should just do all governance in the citizen house, one vote per person, like in real life. And just delete the OP token. VC and the Optimism team can convert to equity instead.

I don’t think this is necessary. By definition, those that are selling are removing themselves from governance. It will literally handle itself without governance action. If they receive new tokens in the future, and sell them as well, and this causes the price to drop, then they are giving people who have not been awarded an airdrop a means to join the governance community.

So far, I’m only seeing positive outcomes to general distribution of tokens to everyone who qualifies, regardless of their desire to govern or delegate or sell.

The only downside to airdrop recipients selling is the price drop, and the only people that ‘hurts’ is speculators that intend to sell when the price is higher.

2 Likes

Nice but what about liquidity providers

Liquidity providers are the backbone of the protocol and they shouldn’t be in disadvantage by any means. If someone sells half of his airdrop for a LP-pool and he will be excluded from future airdrops this is a problem and not fair

Agree But 1st Remove the Whales are From Airdrop List

all people want profit i think mostly people have taget when sell. if op = 1$ have some peolpe sell and have many people hold but if op = 100 $ i think have many people sell . 10-20k accounts sell because they satisfied in price.

1 Like

Totally agreed with you.

I think the multiplier is the right way to go here, just because of narrative reasons really.

From Optimism’s perspective there is no real benefit to giving tokens to people just so they can sell them, while people can frame it as helping to provide market liquidity or whatever, those aren’t really core benefits to the Optimism Collective. Lots of the arguments here that sellers shouldn’t miss out on the next airdrop seem to not be thinking about it in terms of the primary reason for the drop, it’s not to egalitarianly give people money.

On the other hand, clearly plenty of people who do want to participate in governance, public goods discussion, building the ecosystem and other general phoenix spawning activities will still have sold some of their tokens, even if just for tax reasons.

Therefore rather than blacklisting addresses, surely the solution is that sellers should get less of the next airdrop. Obviously it doesn’t numerically make much of a difference if this takes the form of multiplying the next allocation by the percentage you held (so if you sold 20% you’d only receive 80% of the next one) or the inverse with lower base amounts, so non-sellers would get extra by some factor compared to sellers… but because humans aren’t great at maths I’m sure the latter would be seen as the better option!

[Edit - Disclaimer - I haven’t sold and don’t intend to, this may bias my opinion]

5 Likes

Definitely buying it more.