PROPOSAL: Voting rights for .sol holders

I propose that .sol holders should have voting rights (gFIDA), commensurate with the amount they have invested into the ecosystem. This is different from an airdrop (which seems to be people asking for a financial incentive, no comment on that).

Why?

  1. .sol holders have skin in the game: the funds they spent on .sol domains.

  2. The burns of auction proceeds of sale support the price of FIDA, helping to fund past and future development, the DAO, and remunerate the Bonfida team.

  3. .sol holders are affected by decisions of the DAO, and likely have valuable contributions to make.

It seems logical and fair that they should have governance rights commensurate with the funds they have contributed, and continue to contribute, to the ecosystem.

I see several issues with something like this:

  • Fairness: If Alice spent x on her domain name and Bob y (with y >> x) why would Bob get more voting power? The price of a domain name does not necessarily reflect someone’s investment in the community

  • Self trading: Alice buys a random domain for a small amount, creates a secondary auction and buys it with a different wallet. Suddenly her domain name is worth a lot and she gets a lot of voting power

1 Like

I agree.
People buy domains for different reasons. Giving them more rights for spending more money does not make any sense.

I believe there could be more or new ways to incentivize the .sol holder - but giving them free money or free rights might not be the correct ones. It just needs more ideas and brainstorming.

I think one simple way to incentivise people to vote is to reward them for voting. We can think about something like x FIDA get airdropped on people who voted. The exact mechanism would have to be more sophisticated to prevent people from exploiting it though.

This will be exploited in no time.
I can already see cartels of people formed to create topics, vote and earn FIDA.

I hold multiple .sol domains but I am not looking to get any airdrop for those.
I bought those because I wanted to.

I think best thing for .sol holders will be integrations and creating a great brand. If the brand is strong, I can already see new launches incentivizing .sol holders.

People have become addicted to airdrops. It doesn’t mean everything has to be one.

2 Likes

@bonfida: * Fairness: If Alice spent x on her domain name and Bob y (with y >> x) why would Bob get more voting power? The price of a domain name does not necessarily reflect someone’s investment in the community

  1. Why? Because they have contributed more funds to Bonfida/FIDA. Price reflects financial investment in the community, similarly to staking FIDA.

  2. A base case could be every domain gets [x] votes regardless of price.

@bonfida: * Self trading: Alice buys a random domain for a small amount, creates a secondary auction and buys it with a different wallet. Suddenly her domain name is worth a lot and she gets a lot of voting power

  1. Most .sol holders won’t do this and they should not be punished for the sins of a minority.

  2. I agree some people might self-trade in the future to obtain governance rights, but if a snapshot is taken today, nobody has yet self-traded to obtain governance rights, because they do not exist for .sol holders yet. So it is not YET an issue, and not a justification for cutting .sol holders out of the DAO.

  3. It would not be free - self-trading has costs - ie. the 1-5% transaction fee on SNS.

@solanageek: I think best thing for .sol holders will be integrations and creating a great brand. If the brand is strong, I can already see new launches incentivizing .sol holders.

I agree this is important and support this, but it is not mutually exclusive from my proposal. It is a false dichotomy. We can, and should, do both.

People have become addicted to airdrops. It doesn’t mean everything has to be one.

This is a straw man argument. I absolutely do not care about airdrops. The substance of my proposal is that domain holders should have representation in the DAO commensurate with the financial contribution they have made to Bonfida and FIDA token holders. I am agnostic as to how such rights would be distributed. My understanding is that voting rights are now represented by gFIDA, but if there’s a way to assign voting rights without distributing gFIDA, great!

You could base 1 domain = 20usd. Keep the rate static, and allows everyone with a domain to vote.