Hi! This is a nice and faire proposal.
I have some questions… maybe you can point me to some place where this has been already discussed…
Is there a vesting period on the DIGG released?
Will be there a kind of UNI or sushi pool with DIGG / WBTC Sett? Will DIGG be able to be staked?
When is the snapshot date?
It was included by mistake as the drafter missed the allocation details that are in the original medium articles. Check out the articles that I linked in the edited note for details of the supply breakdown.
I read it. Who are these early contributors? and do they still own badger and are staking? It’d be nice for the community to know who these early contributors are 
Please take a read through our forum and ask these questions in our discord instead of in a thread.
Here you are DIGG and BADGER Post DIGG Launch Week 1 Emissions
ótimo trabalho pessoal! Estou muito feliz por fazer parte da família do texugo graças a todos os desenvolvedores da família do texugo … o céu é o limite para nós. obrigado texugo 
Thanks for the amazing work and working with a diverse community so get such a resounding agreement.
Please remind total emissions - was the decision 6250 DIGG over 10 week farm and here you are talking about 9.5% so total 600 DIGG hitting market as airdrop at opening? Will the remainder 5650 be rebased together with circulating supply?
This all looks great and I very much agree.
Only thing: It would be great if the NFT mining would also be considered as staking. I for example put most of my earned Badgers from LP staking there (still no NFT minted, though).
I like this proposal, I think it is balanced and fair, I voted for
I just would like to clarify.
So, 9.5% will be distributed to existing and previous participants of the Badger setts , 0.5% will have more details released soon, and 5% will be distributed to existing and previous BADGER airdrop participants. Is it correct?
Great work team! Couldn’t feel more confident in the community moving forward- good place for capital
Accidentally voted for. I disagree with punishing long term LPs/stakers under the guise of “fairness,” and this is coming from someone who started staking yesterday. As far as reward distribution goes, this is one of the worst models I’ve seen to date. When it comes to fairness, simplicity wins—always. Punishing long term users who didn’t dump their BADGER is beyond stupid, and I struggle to see the appeal. Do you honestly believe giving everyone a smaller amount will dampen volatility in the form of mass sell offs? Think again. These long term holders that would, if not for the root factor, get a bigger stack are less likely to dump than the yield farmers in it for the APY%. Furthermore, by giving less to long term stakers/LPs, and more (relatively) to yield farmers, you are in fact contributing to a bigger dump, since the former are more likely to hold, and the latter, the opposite. That being said, I will enjoy dumping my DIGG as soon as I get it, and buying back in at a 80% discount.
I would say that your statement proves that our initial idea for this proposal actually worked. It was put in place to prevent whales from depositing yesterday and getting the same rewards as someone who staked a month ago. Yes, they may have staked smaller amounts but our strength is in numbers, not privileged individuals that would get a big piece of the pie and run governance as they please.
I applaud the root factor and think that it is a brilliant idea. Join the discord channel and see how many dedicated people are working on this project. Most of them don’t have the capital to compete with whales but they are more productive than the folks that just bought a bunch of Badger, staked it, and moved on with their lives.
This distribution model will serve as an example for any serious DAO project that emerges in the future. DAOs need contributors on all fronts, not only USD value providers.
IMO, if it weren’t for the founding team and the early contributors, we would not have DIGG (or BADGER) in the first place. It does not matter how many they are. I think they deserved it.
I think the ratio for each should be swapped. For a small farmer like me, it does not make sense to claim the reward and stake it because of the high gas fee.
For that reason, I did have been providing liquidity from day 1 but haven’t staked my reward. I have not sold my reward either as I am going to add liquidity once my reward grows more.
Do I contribute less than whales?
Great idea guys, you’ve got my full support, let’s get it started guys
There needs to be consideration for the people who took their entire $BADGER stash and minted NFTs with $MEME. I would have just kept them staked if I knew there would be zero compensation for the airdrop. I missed out on a ton of time, $BADGER and $DIGG it seems.
Reposting.
You have to understand that I do agree with this whole proposal, SAVE FOR the root factor. Why should anyone be punished for having a larger piece of the pie? Conversely, yes, you should have a bigger claim the longer you’ve been around for. I just think that the root factor will introduce untold amounts of volatility (& unfairness).
A better way to improve this BIP AND mitigate whale action/damped volatility, while remaining actually fair would be to
Why vesting? Because we must learn from other successful protocols like Synthetix, Compound, Akropolis, & co. At Akropolis, we failed to introduce rewards vesting in the beginning, a complete oversight caused by the desire to get the most out of DeFi summer and irresponsibly potentiate user acquisition. The result was massively increased volatility as the opportunity cost was much too high, and collapse of ADEL’s price—the rewards were high enough to justify the supremely high gas prices at the time (400 Gwei). Vesting would have remedied that, if not fully, at least in part, and significantly so. That being said, ADEL had an unimplemented value accrual mechanism and was thus rushed IMO. DIGG is an algorithmic coin pegged to BTC. It’s a little different, yes, but increased volatility will exponentially accelerate wealth transfer from smart money to dumb money. Most struggle to understand rebasing coins. On a last note, even if the community refuses to remove the root factor (why would the masses? each will vote to their own benefit), rewards vesting should still absolutely be implemented BEFORE DIGG’s launch.
As for your statement that DAOs need contributors. That is accurate. That being said, that’s why DAOs need to have a properly modeled treasury and a community grant program. That statement sounds like a non sequitur.
This edit was an oversight and we changed it back to its original format.
We moved away from the early contributor model for DIGG due to the disproportional allocation now that the Badger users have grown so much.
The total for the community is 15%.
Great seeing this come together folks! Looking forward to the snapshot.
Really like the overall communication finally coming together after the holidays. I’m excited to see digg inching towards the starting line!
I’ll echo the same concerns as many others over the complete lack of consideration given the NFT component. There has never been anything concrete regarding rewards around the campaign despite the large opportunity costs in both digg and badger to bother farming them in the first place.
This “primitive” asset will give people access to BTC value and security/censorship resistance through ETH. Awww don’t I look forward to this :)) .Thank you all devs working on this dream !
p.s Lets assign funds to audit the f out of those contracts in case of any surprises…