And @ratankaliani - just so everyone get’s a perspective of who these early holders are. Here is a story from @lay2000lbs who is founder of Pooltogether (built entirely on compound). He built pooltogether which is probably the best protocol to have come from compound community and he has been engaged every single day from 2018 and does not have 100 COMP to have his voice heard. We are talking about airdropping rewards to folks like this (locking these rewards for 4 years, if needed).
I rest my case here.
I’ve been using Compound for a long time – since December of 2018. I’ve been active in the community and even started working on a protocol built on top of Compound. I’ve received a lot of value from Compound and also created a lot of value for the protocol.
Since COMP distribution started I’ve held everything I’ve received. I’ve also done some market buys to increase my COMP. Despite this, I still don’t have enough COMP to create an autonomas proposal (100 COMP). I do find this discouraging.
I think the idea of getting early participants up to 100 COMP is a good one. Specifically because that is the threshold to meaningfully participate in governance.
In terms of distributing this, I would probably favor some sort of larger up-front airdrop with a slower distribution of the remainder. I think in some ways, if the distribution is slow it actually incentives just selling it. But if I get 50 COMP up front then I am half way to my goal of 100 COMP and I have incentive to hold on…
Agree with your thoughts but I don’t think the distribution will be 100 comp per user since there were revisions and lot of addresses were added from argent etc. I believe it boils down to 10 comp or less given about 20k - 40k addresses are currently eligible for this airdrop .
You have math class on berkeley? For claim 0.48 COMP I need pay 0.3 ETH, with only impact on my wallet. So, you think that members with less funds are idiots? If I go to uniswap and buy COMP only for voting on proposal, is that good practice from community member?
From first post on this thread we read that poor political definition (a16z - where they are?). Your group is calculated medium to long term impact of airdrop distribution? I often read forum, maybe I miss that? That amount of governance power requires perhaps some responsibility?
On COMP Genesis over 50% token was airdroped, and now you can joke with community.
This outcome of the vote is not surprising, the problem is that none of you didnt bring a good argument so far. The question is if you have thought about it at all.
Tonight comp will definitely stand out as an outlier with respect to rewarding early adopters as it didn’t stick to the ethos of decentralization unlike Uniswap, DyDx and now ENS which will be remembered in history for being sincere and helping the community.
As an early user of Compound, I’ve avoided commenting on this thread for several months. Of course I’d want an airdrop! But watching this unfold has left me worried about the compound community and the relationship between its leaders and smaller members, so I thought I’d share a few thoughts.
I don’t feel like compound owes me anything, and I will continue to use the app regardless of the airdrop status. However, I find the shortsightedness of some of the arguments against airdropping — and the reluctance of community leaders to meaningfully participate in a divisive issue — concerning. Developing an active, decentralized community should be compound’s first priority, and it’s baffling that certain people would risk alienating early users for the “future health” of the project.
Of course some early users would dump tokens if there was an airdrop, and many wouldn’t actively participate in governance. However, the outcome we’re headed to — one where community leaders appear to view small users with distrust and indifference — seems much worse.
I mentioned this multiple time in the past as well, i am NOT an early adopter, so even if this passes - i get 0 COMP airdropped for myself
This is (and has always been) against founder/VCs in alienating users and preventing decentralization to preserve their own selfish positions. Irony of it being, whenever there is a COMP hack or SEC comes calling - these same individuals come calling towards smaller voters and call this a decentralized community.
This is truly a black day in compound governance and is a million times worse than a hack or anything COMP has endured in the past.
@rleshner retweeted all past temperature checks/proposals (when there was a hack) from his personal twitter profile, but now he refuses to even retweet this particular temperature check.
All he had to do was say, i do not plan to vote on this topic and stand behind whatever community decides. That’s all it would have taken and he choses to stay silent.
Here we are, heading toward a NO. Very dark day for Compound. The smaller users are no competition to the great fish and VC out here. And we just beginning this DeFi experiment ! Let alone in 5 years ! I can see web 2.0 centralization all over again !
Anyhow, who is controlling the Compound twitter account ? The she/he is playing 4d chess with us, by referring that compound already did this airdrop via Coinbase Earn. It looks like a preparation towards discussion about airdrop / rewards.
why don’t we ask all the VCs to send back their COMP allocations to treasury (so we make good use of it) and we can give all of them voting power.
So a16z will send back their 321k COMP token to treasury, but we can empower them with 321K worth of voting power on decisions.
Does it make sense?
To all initial supporters its same - do you think they are all idiots to yield voting power and contribute to protocol without any perceived expected benefit.
I am 100% you didn’t read more than 5 posts about this topic. When you read discussion you will realize that your comment doesn’t make sense. You even don’t know what is all about and you put few fast solutions just like that.
Also what this idiot votes by those universities ? Have they involved in this thread here ? Should a university not first discuss a proposal before voting ? Why do they have 50k votes each ? Are they somehow involved with some VCs ? I really don’t understand it.
I am wrong, he didn’t read 1 post about this topic.
Check initial COMP distribution, i think more than 50% was reserved, so protocol decentralization wasn’t possible from beginning.
Obviously they are cronies of a16z. Multiple alumni in telegram groups also confirmed what a joke they are. They spent 0 effort trying to read what this topic is about.
But i don’t want to be disrespectful to them just because they voted ‘No’. I have immense respect to people voting ‘No’ than those shameless VCs who are hiding behind the scenes
On the extremely off-chance that they truly did not understand what this effort is about, I truly feel sad for our next generation students coming out of such reputed universities.
