Title: Second ACX Drop Author(s): 0xCaesarSeverus, Justin J Status: Proposal Related Discussions:
Body
Summary:
The Unclaimed Across tokens will be (have been) clawed back and should be given to the bridge users, liquidity providers and voters in a direct airdrop opportunity to reinforce their commitment to the bridge and their community.
Motivation:
The people who use the Across Bridge are committed to the future of the technology and should be rewarded for it. Several Actions should be the focus of the airdrop. The first should be Liquidity Provision, which is the backbone of the bridge. The second action should be the users of the bridge and the last should be those who vote in the proposals.
Specification & Implementation:
50% of the tokens should be immediately airdropped to the Liquidity providers according to the length of time they’ve staked. With special attention to those who stake ACX, and potentially to length of stake. We should also reward those who provide liquidity in ACX pools on Ethereum and Optimism.
20% of the tokens should be focused to those who use the bridge by using 2023 Volume or total transactions.
Lastly, 30% of tokens to reward voters. Those who manage to participate in ballots are some of the most important members of our community.
Rationale:
Those who use Across will be rewarded and have further incentive to use Across in the future. Awarding users is important. 6.7 Million tokens make up a very small percentage of the circulating 295,000,000 ACX and the sell pressure, if any would be negligible.
Downside (Cons):
The downsides are that the tokens are not used to their full potential elsewhere for the DAOs interest.
Voting:
Yes would result in the distribution of the 6.7 million ACX to users - bridge users, liquidity providers and voters.
Yeah, seems alright. Only that I would do 30% bridge users and 20% voters. But then, we do have some problems with the number of voters. So yeah, seems fair.
I had one idea, but I do not know if is worthy of mention. What about some way to burn ACX in order to boost the ACX liquidity rewards? Like to buy the time needed to max up the max reward.
50% of the tokens should be immediately airdropped to the Liquidity providers - spot on!
20% of the tokens should be focused to those who use the bridge by using 2023 Volume or total transactions. - top stuff again!
Lastly, 30% of tokens to reward voters. Those who manage to participate in ballots are some of the most important members of our community - yes please
I don’t think a second airdrop would create value out of thin air but would instead dilute the tokens myself and others are holding and potentially dilute yield returns on LP’s in the process. Things are going well for Across and I don’t think we need to ask for more free tokens. As an ACX holder we all own a share in treasury anyways and I’d rather make sure we reward those who are in it long term then give away tokens for people to dump now.
These tokens were initially intended to be airdropped to users, or intended to be apart of the circulating supply. It would not be dilution in any way to do this. We are just giving these tokens to wallets that’ll collect them.
Additionally, the total supply of ACX tokens is 1 Billion with a circulating supply of 315 Million. 6.7 Million Tokens would be a 2.1% expansion of the current supply. This is but a sliver of the tokens which have been vested or locked within the total supply.
Furthermore, this proposal is about giving these tokens, which were not claimed originally, to those who use the bridge and would likely not sell the tokens. If you have better ways decide this - beyond those listed above - I would be open to suggestions.
To reiterate, this proposal is simply about giving unclaimed ACX tokens to the AVX community. 6.7 Million ACX is currently valued at ~ 1.19 Million USDC to likely less than 1500 wallets.
As an ACX Holder, I don’t think this action would prove detrimental to the value of the token, in fact I think buy rewarding holders it increases the commitment to the community.
I am not sure if burning 6.7 Million tokens will increase the value of the 315 Million in circulation. This may hold merit, but I have not seen token burns that add value unless they are consistently being burnt.
The percentages you said are well balanced. In most cases someone who has LP will probably vote as well. Something I always pointed out during votes is that even small holders are getting involved
I think this is a good idea. These tokens were meant to be airdropped, if everyone who could have collected them would have, they would be out there, so these are tokens the protocol expected to be circulating. And the proposed number of tokens being discussed are a small % of what’s out there.
Secondly, I like this idea because recently we have decreased ACX emissions for liquidity providers in both the ACX pool AND the multipliers. So this would be something good to encourage continued support of the bridge.
And it’s funny, TheRealTuna and I have talked about this before, and I love you man, but I’m just not on the same page with you that the circulating ACX tokens, especially at this point, have a real impact on the value. If the token goes up, it will be because of the confidence people have in Across and the value in provides, not because tokens are held close to the vest by the protocol.
I can’t get it to make sense to me that the token volume can impact token value when there are 1 BILLION of them. If the concern of the protocol was to support token value by limiting the supply, a much smaller number would have been created. Creating so many ACX tokens just tells you that the protocol did not intend to strictly control the supply of the token to prop up value.
But the use of the bridge and attracting new liquidity providers is probably best accomplished by word of mouth. The word of mouth to attract new bridge users will likely be because of the speed and value of the bridge, however, incentivizing users to attract other users can’t be a bad idea. It is possible that I agree the 30% of tokens proposed to go to bridge users could be part of the referral program possibly?
But the only way word of mouth with attract more liquidity providers is to keep liquidity providers happy and provide a good return. And let’s face it, who should Across like to get a good ROI more than those who supported the bridge from day #1? I can’t get on board that my ROI improves if I have less ACX tokens.
I like this but how about we set aside a small amount of tokens for a campaign to bring awareness to Across if this is air drop season 2 with multiple new chains this is the perfect opportunity to put that use
how many tokens would you think to allocate to a campaign? If this happened I’d say a maximum of 1,000,000 ACX which is a modest ~150,000. I just think it should go to the active community.
Maybe in the bridge user portion we could even include people who are using bridge aggregators.
My take, 70% or 45% should go to active bridgoors, 25% to exceptional community members (honestly not sure this is suppose to be there, since we have had one in the past) The bridgoors should take the better part of the drop, those that have done volume. If possible, a point system should be introduced, if not too late, even though it is a second drop. The only thing with this is that, there will definitely be a rise in volume we see, however, it is not sustainable, since people will only come around for the points and hence the token, but those will stay will stay. LPs/ Stakers are also loyalist of the project and so about 30% should go to them.
I am a beneficial of the first community drop, and I actively contributed to Across. Never taken out a penny from my allocation. I am definitely routing for the bigger success of the protocol.
Title: (enter proposal title) Author(s): (enter name(s) of associated authors) Status: (RFC, Proposal, Vote) Related Discussions: (optional - paste link here) Submission Date: (Enter Date)
Body
Summary:
Give us a TL;DR on your proposal; no more than 2-3 sentences.
Motivation:
What problems will this proposal address/solve? What’s the value-add?
Specification & Implementation:
Describe the proposal in as much detail as is necessary. Explain the vision for the proposal. How will this affect the protocol both technically, socially, financially (if applicable), and governance-wise? What steps need to be taken to implement this proposal?
Rationale:
Explain any decisions above that were chosen over an alternative. Why is this the best way to do it? How will the implementation of this proposal advance the protocol?
Downside (Cons):
Are there any disadvantages with implementing the proposal? Are there any security considerations or potentially negative financial exposures to consider?
Voting:
Define what a “yes” and “no” vote entails. Once the proposal moves to a vote, please include the link to Snapshot here.
Took a look at the post and the comments. Here are my thoughts:
We had originally airdropped these tokens and they were left unclaimed (idle/unused), if we use a similar criteria to airdrop (reward bridgooors), we’re going to end up with unclaimed tokens again and will have to continuously repeat this process until the airdrop gets smaller and smaller.
We’ve been hitting 99% utilization of USDC recently. A few months ago it was DAI. We’re paying out sky high APY to attract more liquidity and that’s not easy to sustain forever.
That being said, I am against this proposal. For these reasons: We already pay out Across LPs 2x, 3x more than other bridges for the same token, even 4x sometimes more than AAVE, etc. so we’re already “giving away” ACX at a rapid rate. The best use of the tokens, in my opinion, is to keep them in the treasury to pay out LP rewards because more capital is what we are in urgent need of. If people get a sudden airdrop they are more likely (maybe) to withdraw their LP because they won’t need to earn ACX anymore (worst case scenario). So, anything that encourages that behaviour, I would want to avoid.
I agree with what you’re saying but even if these tokens were collected in the airdrop, ACX would still be giving away tokens, in your terms. I don’t think ACX gives away tokens. Every ACX I have I earned as an LP by pledging my own assets to the liquidity pools. The larger issue is that these LPs would likely not be there without the subsidies provided by the treasury.
I think there is a misconception between giving away something versus what is earned. Regardless, These tokens were destined to be given away and I believe they should be given away, rather than earned.
Airdropping tokens to the same old people makes no sense. Airdrops can be a cheap and effective marketing tool to gain exposure to “NEW” communities if executed properly, but they don’t typically attract active bridge users. Across is a key infrastructure that requires more integrations and partnerships. Instead of spending these tokens on users, they should be used as incentives for people to “build/integrate” across and for CEX listings that enhance awareness, increase liquidity, and lend legitimacy to the project. Once there are more real/organic users, I wouldn’t mind airdropping some, but currently, it wouldn’t fuel any growth. In summary, I’m 100% against new airdrops, and if fair value distribution is the goal, we might as well burn them.