I like the proposal, but would adress two opinions:
I dont think vesting is a good idea, we want liquidity from the start.
Hopefully those “nifty things” are for us that is farming pineapples to get BadgerDAO meme NFTs with our bBadger and gave up time in the staking contract
And i really dont get all the people here asking for people that sold the airdrop to dont get any, and you that is so “loyal” to get more.
Not a good attitude in this space imo, be kind, be grateful. Respect that those who recieved the airdop deserved it, and if they claimed and sold they`re still here exploring the space.
I claimed 3 days late and sold them instantly , then i stayed in the discord reading and decided buying 10x more than i sold to a 30% higher price than i got from sale so.
We need liquidity so that people can exit or new people join.
seeking feedback:
-on poll question #2 “should airdrop be vested?” i voted “yes - two weeks” thinking that in order to bring in more active users with this event it might be beneficial to incentivize them to stake for the first week after claiming until they can unlock the remainder of the vested airdrop + rewards earned from staking initial airdrop claim to see how the system works with only gas risk.
-after thinking about this and not having actively participated in a rebasing system prior to this (other than getting slightly rekt in yamo), it seems like it may be better to let people claim the entire airdrop at once with no vesting. so i kind of feel like i would change my vote to “no” but idk man im just out here
is it? and is the airdrop dumping considered bad or an opportunity? where to look fam… maybe i need to look at other rebasing tokens on dune? i don’t pay for nansen yet but when i do im finna be surfing w the rest of u casual dex traders
that’s a good point. rewarding badger cover users with $digg sends an incentive to long term minded depositers because it isn’t profitable to purchase insurance if ur plan is to degen in and out
It looks like a reasonable number overall that would imply the initial market cap around 92.625 mil.
For the convenience of calculating the value of 1 Genesis DIGG, I suggest adjusting the initial supply a tiny bit.
For example, with the numbers above we could use 4454.3429844098 DIGG as the initial supply.
This number will be continuously changing, so it doesn’t need to be even.
However, if someone would like to know the value of 1 Genesis DIGG, he/she could easily multiply its Market cap * 0.02245%.
love it! would prefer a shorter lock-up + smaller market cap. I think big market cap will create a lot of unneeded noise around valuation & speculation.
Adoption by the general crypto community should be put as a priority for this launch. A full supply launch seems to make sense to avoid distribution scheduling confusion and get it in the hands of as many supporters asap. Though a brief vesting period (i.e. 1-2 weeks) might be too short to embrace newcomers as it might create volatility/downwards pressure early on. Hence, I’m in support of full supply at launch, providing a relatively lengthy 8 week vesting period.
I love the emphasis on rewarding low - level staker loyalty.
One idea I am curious to hear what anyone thinks (is it dumb af, for instance) is to offer holders of rebase tokens with a certain TVL (idk which, ESD? Ampl?) the opportunity to exchange their rebasing tokens for an equivalent value of $Digg with a small bonus available post some vesting period.
This could do 2 things:
1- incentivize people who are already IN on the rebasing mechanism to at least engage with $DIGG. Spread awareness via vitality of “bonus” opportunity (anons tweeting “the real free alpha is…” type shit)
2-build up a reserve of rebasing stable coins that could either be placed into LP pools, or simply the DAO treasury, to be used as the community sees fit.
Just a thought!
Thanks to all who have worked on $Badger and $DIGG launch thus far!
The current price action (massive BADGER dump) points to this needing some work.
I suggest rewarding loyal community members and airdrop only to addresses still staked.
Experience on dynamic supply tokens (like AMPL) showed that it’s much better to beginn with a low initial supply which gradually increases - instead of having negative rebases right from the start.