I think this is a really bad idea. As others have stated there can be thousands of reasons why somebody sells. What I’d do instead is not to punish “bad actors” but reward good actors. It is so much easier to make a whitelist than to make a blacklist. Just reward those people disproportionally who did these things for example:
Held onto $OP
Delegated to someone or was active in governance
Used tool x, y or z since the airdrop
etc…
This whole thing was blown out of proportion. Let them sell. Make a list of people who you want to reward, not a list of people you hate.
Also…the criteria for the first airdrop was less then ideal. For example I should have been eligible for “priced out of Ethereum” since I’ve been using L2s for a very long time, but there was a limit, so only whales got rewarded.
I have also been using Gnosis, but I didn’t match that criteria either (I didn’t check but probably because I’m not a whale).
The initial distribution wasn’t something that I would call fair.
Voting Rights - People who have sold your right have given up the fundamental right of democracy in a decentralized economy or in this case Optimism Network. Reason is no incentive to hold the voting right currently.
Violation of the right - No it is not. Since all token holders have delegated their right to representatives.
President Truman: vote is the best way of getting the kind of country and the kind of world you want.”
Rather than talking about the next Airdrop ( Money grab ) talk about important improvements that can bring towards the voting process.
** **
Idea!
May lock the $Op tokens when delegating until the voting is done.
Give those who locked up $Op some incentives like staking reward
Those who participate in the delegation ( token locked ) can get more staking rewards or the next airdrop.
Then citizens will be more loyal to the process and it will add value to the ecosystem.
Rather than just selling the Air drop in the first day or first week then people will hold it and participate in the new governance process.
This creates a demand for the voting rights and the $Op token.
Personal note: the current process. It’s a failed experiment. This should be fixed!
Going to have to disagree with the OP here and assert this entire discussion is a collective waste of all our time and resources.
Those addresses you mentioned? They were indentified specifically by Optimism and rewarded so handsomely because they were already determined to be good stewards and valuable contributors to the same values as those held by Optimism. It’s literally why they got so much $OP.
Meanwhile, the vast majority couldn’t even claim until the price had tanked 50% and you want to fault them for selling? I see absolutely nothing wrong with selling something you believe in; if you see things falling off a cliff. You stil want to get back in but are you supposed to take a bullet for Optimism? Of course not.
And for myself, I LPed $OP - meaning I sold some $OP for $USDC so that I could add liquidity on Velodrome and also Uniswap - does this active participation mean I should also be labeled as anti-Optimism. Again, of course not - LPing is engaging productively in a new ecosystem in one of the most supportive ways possible.
This feels more like a witch hunt then anything else. Which is what the entire past couple months have felt like to be blunt with all the “sybil attackers” and other nonsense that has consumed so much time. Hundreds of applications could have been built and deployed to Optimism with time spent ticking boxes and this is not how I envision a decentralized and prosperous Collective to function; not in the least.
For the sake of everyone, I would suggest just drop it. Don’t airdrop such large amounts to relatively few people. Move forward and support the ecosystem so that it doesn’t implode like we all watched Fantom do with drama quite similar to this in nature.
Felt compelled to share some thoughts here - the time you spent researching could have been spent building some awesome Dashboards on Dune and the time I spent writing this I could have been setting up sweet new markets on Exotic Markets etc.
Don’t mean to be too negative either here; I understand the points being made. I’d just continue to point out: big picture. To thrive; there is not enough bandwidth then 100% focus by all involved here on bringing assets and talent to Optimism. Period.
Exactly. agree with time wasting time and resources just to find few sybils. Unfortunately the same results the token dumped to the max. no value added to the time spend and resources.
I think this could be done, if announced beforehand. Then people could decide what would be more important to them, governance/future airdrop or quick cash grab - as an active decision.
It seems a bit vindictive to announce this in hindsight.
Perhaps with more nuance. Penalize those who sell then leave (don’t continue using the network afterward) – NOT those who merely sell to use other tokens on the network.
Discourage mercenary capital, don’t discourage actual usage – that’s exactly why we paid them to join!!!
This proposal is not constructive nor productive at all. The reality is that the Optimism Network and protocols that utilize it were battle tested during the surge in Optimism sell pressure. The protocol was pushed to its limits and the developers even had to run upgrades on the fly. Hop discovered it had a liquidity issue when bridge volume spiked. It was an epic moment in Optimism history. Allowing Optimism holders to run nodes to decentralize & secure the network is far more constructive than this salty proposal.
I wish there was a burn feature in the contract. So when someone would dump their airdrop tokens they would be burned (50%) or put into a fund for hodlers! Only tokens earmarked by the collective should be sold on DEX or CEX at real value with no burn! I have been apart of a lot of drops. When I saw this happening on CoinGecko, I thought “What a Sh!t Show!” So much for Impact = Profit. I love the OP here but people have to be realistic. Human nature is something we have to safe guard ourselves from (Greed, FOMO, $$$) I’m not anti money, profit or free market but I do believe in being in individual choice and accountability. I do believe it’s up to the collective to set boundaries and given consequences to bad acters!
Having some problems with that. I didn’t sell any tokens from airdrop, more than that I bought more tokens. But I used CEX for this purpose, so to have all my tokens and balances in one place I sent all my OPs to CEX account. How do you suggest to monitor such situations?
Just adding my 2cents here:
I agree w the sentiment of this, but don’t think it should be put into practice.
For one, where would the line be drawn? Do users who take the $OP and for instance put it into a balancer pool loose out in this case? Technically it would be swapping OP tokens to meet the pool balance… So it would be tough to weed out who actually held…
2nd, this amount of money is SO different to people in different parts of the world and in far diff. economic situations. Very possible for somebody to be a huge supporter of Optimism, weigh in and help w governance, participate in all positive ways, but holding ~3,000 USD worth of one coin is just a HUGE amount of money. To others w greater financial standing, it may seem like a drop in their bucket and they could easily hold w hopes of qualifying for the next airdrops w the intent of dumping still.
TLDR: I like the thought but needs a bit more work to do it properly.
A crystal clear criteria should be: everyone who sold the airdrop BEFORE the official claiming started should be removed from future airdrops. These are the ones who sold between $3-4 and dumped the price whereas others who claimed the airdrop afterwards and are still hodling got rekt. The early sellers started the dumpfeast and the ones who still hodl are sitting on a token worth 75% less than one week ago. This is a no go in fairness!
agree with time wasting time and resources just to find few sybils. Unfortunately the same results the token dumped to the max. no value added to the time spend and resources.