Making Voting an exclusion Criteria for Airdrop

So first of all, I know there is no announcement regarding eligibilty criteria for the airdrop and every decision will be internal by the team. Second voting for the timing of the airdrop proposal will not make you eligible for the airdrop. These both are absolutely logical points and team should have the full authority to decide who is eligible for the airdrop and who is not.

What I propose is that make the voting a mandatory criteria for the airdrop where if you havn’t voted, you are not eligible for the airdrop but if you have voted that doesn’t make you eligible for the airdrop. So the team will decide the criteria and who is eligible for the airdrop and among those who are eligible, those who haven’t voted will be excluded.

So why is so what will it achieve. Well think what is the purpose of building a community and having a DAO for governance- because you wan’t to make the protocol decentralized. But if community members are not participating in the governance through voting and decision-making, that will defeat the purpose of a DAO. And this vote is our very first community governance.

Now suppose you just want to airdrop to the first 100 people who joined the Discord because they were the very early supporters. But will it solve any purpose if some of these first 100 haven’t voted on the forum. If they havn’t voted here how do you think they will participate in the governance of the DAO.

These are just my thoughts on the subject. Please comment you objections, I will be happy to read.

27 Likes

I don’t agree, in fact strongly disagree on this logic.

We don’t want to build a wall around the project that is so high that new people are unable to climb in.

Remember that the project will be successful only if we gain traction, price appreciation needs a constant growth in the number of people getting in.

We are voting today because we are all here and we CHOOSE for the drops to happen a certain way (option A vs option B). New comers are already missing out on that. There’s no need to punish them even harder by not letting them be a part of the drop.

27 Likes

That’s good point but if it is decided then an announcement should be made both in discord and on twitter and voting should be extended for atleast a week from such announcement.

5 Likes

Valid point but by the looks of it, new comers won’t anyway be eligible for the airdrop. But it is good to hear your thoughts. Thank you

7 Likes

Hello to the team.i read your thoughts and where very clear.i believe that all people have voted to be eligible for the airdroop.The reason is that indigo will become more and more stronger .The airdroop use is fabulous!!As it conserns the first 100 people who where earlier you could just give them a 10% more airdroop for the others although havent voted.Thats is my opinion.Have a nice sunday

8 Likes

If so, wasn’t it necessary to suggest voting as a condition for receiving the airdrop?

3 Likes

I think everyone stand the same with this, if you are 1 of the first 100 or not, if you follow all the steps and upcoming steps for the airdrop you should just be eligible for it as anybody else.

There are always people that will leave a project after a airdrop and thats fine, everyone can make their own decision, but even people that come in today for the first time may have the same interest about the project just like you or me

At this time its definetly best to let the team decide how they will or want to do it, they will know what is best.

I am here for the long run

8 Likes

I’d say having the gate open for an airdrop is evident. The DAO shouldn’t be using a utiltiy token to make money directly, for ethical and legal reasons.

Now rewarding everybody the same is pretty unfair imo and maybe a solution for airdropping to OGs, wannabe engaged members and not only cryptotwitter sharks and traders is to make an another airdrop for the user of the platform after indigo goes live.

“Many” airdrops makes juicy marketing and it’s not so much coding ( setting a snapshot over user deposit funds some time after [1 month or 1 year?] after launching).

3 Likes

I say trust the team to make the right call. Not a big deal to me because I’m aping in asap either way🦍

5 Likes

I think the best way is to go about this is really just not to incentivize voting too much, although obviously we definitely still want people to vote. My main concern here is that this will skew the voting data as there will be people who are voting for the sake of voting, they don’t have to care about the protocol since they just want the airdrop.

Right now if we do this we might not see that much of an impact given the huge majority is going for at launch airdrop, but what if we were at 55:45 ratio? or even an almost 50:50? Random voting will throw that number into imbalance and the results in the end will not necessarily reflect the true community opinion. There are right and wrong ways to encourage participation. I trust the team has considered this point at length and has already planned ahead.

1 Like

It has been clear also in Discord about the voting, and all the guys are mentioning about it so there is help and guidance for everyone

3 Likes

The more people that join and show an interest in a project, the more successful it is likely to be. Making people feel excluded because they discovered a project a little later than others risks missing out on potential growth. Perhaps increasing rewards for long-term supporters is a good idea, but so is attracting support from those who have only recently discovered the project.

5 Likes

Building a strong community and DAO is all about engagement so more engagement the better and there are many forms of engagement, getting the INDY governance token should just be a benefit of being engaged.

1 Like

Engagement because you want to be involved and give input to the project is different from voting to be eligible for the airdrop. I like the way the team has is setup currently. Voting does not guarantee you entry in the airdrop, and the airdrop criteria is not disclosed. Encouraging more involvement in the project is great, but encouraging voting by providing rewards can bring bad actors into the fold who are not interested in the project but are hoping to make a quick buck.

2 Likes

At the end of the day, team wants to build a community. If you keep too many restrictions, it will only benefit the few that get selected at the end.

5 Likes

“by the looks of it, new comers won’t anyway be eligible for the airdrop”

What brings you to that conclusion?

1 Like

I mean, just not being eligible for an airdrop is probably not a wall too high to climb.
I think a kind of tier system would be a good compromise.

Let’s say until airdrop dates there are 10 votes (or other ways to contribute to the indigo ecosystem) and for each vote, community members will receive a certain amount of the airdrop. This will ensure that early supporters will actually be rewarded while not excluding people that only heard about the project last minute.

3 Likes

I strongly disagree. The main proposite of this protocol must be usability. If they changed rules, Indigo will loose the credibility and people could think that this protocol changes rules like a person changes the clothers.

7 Likes

I think the team was crystal clear that the voting was just part of the eligibility criteria for the airdrop and that ONLY voting wouldn’t guarantee the airdrop. Although we don’t know what one should do to receive the airdrop, they already know. Even though I agree that the early supporters should have benefits, I also think that we might miss many potential “ambassador” just because they discovered Indigo later than others. In the end, as @rs04 said, we need people getting in to growth both in price appreciation (for those whose profit is the main reason they got on-board) and as community (for those who price appreciation is just a consequence of solid work in the ecosystem).

3 Likes

While I understand where you are coming from… I cannot disagree more strongly with your suggestion. If it is my money/token/property, and I decide I want to give it to person XYZ, I should not need to justify it nor should our governance system allow for us to legislate who projects/teams are allowed to give their tokens to for any generic reason.

1 Like