Before we proceed with the mint and distribution of the rest of the Root Tokens we should vote on some of the key parameters.
We’ve already discussed limiting their max supply to 255 and I think we now need to imprint that decision through this proposal.
We should also decide on how many Root Tokens we want to reserve for IPv4DAO needs.
We’ve already distributed 8 out of 255 Root Tokens to the season 0 contributors.
I think we should:
reserve 6 tokens for those who will go through the FIBL and KYC processes required for BVI incorporation
reserve 24 tokens for a grant to future season 1 contributors
reserve 25 tokens for special partnerships
This way we will have the following distribution of tokens:
1-8: Season 0 contributors (Already distributed)
9-200: Root Token Sale
201-225: Special Partnerships
226-231: Incorporation grant
232-255: Season 1 contributors
Let’s discuss this distribution.
A few more thoughts about the distribution of tokens.
We will only be able to keep the token order from the last section in case if we pre-mint all of the tokens and then distribute them.
That may be not the best strategy, as we may want to mint tokens directly by users to avoid paying extra marketplace fees.
That being said we shouldn’t consider this distribution as an exact order.
For example, we may mint token(s) for Special Partnerships way before the token count reaches 200.
Also, we may want to describe our vision regarding the resell fees for Root Tokens in this proposal.
Such a fee could be later applied to the entire collection through a marketplace interface.
That way every future Root Token resell transaction will send a certain percentage of the transaction amount (usually 5-10%) to the IPv4DAO treasury.
I think we should fix the upper limit for such a fee to 10% for this collection, to decrease the ambiguity and risks for future token holders.
Another thing to decide is how to validate the distribution of the token to partners.
It may be too time-consuming and slow to vote on each Root Token distribution so maybe we should:
- allow 1 Root Token to 1 Partner distribution without any vote - just publicly announce that decision to the IPv4DAO before sending the token
- require off-chain discussion for 2 Root Tokens to 1 Partner
- require an on-chain vote for everything more than 2 Root Tokens
I agree with your proposal. And KYC / FIBL tokens are Incorporation grant, corect?
Can we also define clearly what is ‘special partnership’? Ideally with examples, of what kind of collaboration falls into this cathegory.
I think the special partnership is when we grant a token to persons or companies who could help us in building & growing our DAO without being involved as an active contributor.
They could be providing their expertise and influence or helping us to promote our DAO.
For example, we could distribute some tokens to Twitter influencers, to increase awareness for our project.
We could as well give out a token to outstanding engineers or users with deep knowledge of IPv4 systems.
That could be done in exchange for advice or to try to get them involved with IPv4DAO.
The difference between Special Partnership and contributors’ compensation is that we may give Special Partnership tokens in advance.
That’s my take on this, but that should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
And yes KYC/FIBL tokens in this scheme are related to an Incorporation grant which compensates the efforts related to company formation.
OK, I think I will prepare the proposal on the snapshot for that now.