I agree with you. I support community justice.
I think we shouldnât ban people who sell them. But it should give more privileges to the person holding the op coin.
Sisagree, freedom of choice is a natural right of individuals, if we start to segregate, Freedom is lost !!!.
Cheers!
Yes, I totally agree with you. We need to find the way to prevent this.
Yes, agree on first point
I agree but only for people who bridge everything out of Optimism
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.â
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. Itâs a failed experiment. This should be fixed!
1 Like
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. Itâs literally why they got so much $OP.
Meanwhile, the vast majority couldnât 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 âsybil attackersâ 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. Donât airdrop such large amounts to relatively few people. Move forward and support the ecosystem so that it doesnât 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.
Donât mean to be too negative either here; I understand the points being made. Iâd 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.
Weston Nelson
3 Likes
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.
1 Like
you said it all. nothing to add. agreed
1 Like
I think the community should select a certain proportion. Someone maybe have to acquire liquidity.
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 (donât continue using the network afterward) â NOT those who merely sell to use other tokens on the network.
Discourage mercenary capital, donât discourage actual usage â thatâs 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 âWhat a Sh!t Show!â 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, $$$) Iâm not anti money, profit or free market but I do believe in being in individual choice and accountability. I do believe itâs up to the collective to set boundaries and given consequences to bad acters!
your opinion is so great man
Having some problems with that. I didnât 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?
1 Like
Just adding my 2cents here:
I agree w the sentiment of this, but donât 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 heldâŚ
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!
1 Like
Hi everyone,
from my perspective, this is not good proposal. Here are my points.
-
We are trying to spread freedom for money - this is crypto community about. So from that point penalising someone for using their own money for their own purpose is really against values, mision and vision of Satoshi in the first place.
-
We will ban accounts from receiving new airdrops, but what will stop these people of making other accounts and receive airdrop from different account?
-
Try to think - Is this proposal driven by common good, or only by our individual anger, because token ins dumping on price because of this actions?
I think we should more think about how to engage people not to sell token in future. And this must be personal need of every person. So token need to have some function or value, which will give people will not to sell it at all.
-
Gas payments:
Change the use of OP tokens from a governance token to the main network token for gas payment -
Some other incentive in voting or for example some badges in community. I dont know how, just giving creative question.
-
Discounts on different dApps for using or hodling OP token.
-
Better yields for holding some amount of token (for example something like BNB on Binance VIP).
So in total I would focus energy not to slash addresses, but create ideas how to keep people of selling tokens.
I we need to remember, that crypto is financial area and people will always want to get benefit of it.
Thats why Satoshi vision is so great, because every participant in network is benefiting of it. 