As far as I can see the only staking available are for LP positions. Is that what you are referring to?
Suggesting for the ticker to change to: $PIC
Nice proposal @jnova, thank you for putting it together.
I’m personally not sold on the idea that $PLAY would be better off without NFTs besides the fact that the ticker reminds more about games than other things but I suggest we don’t get into paralysis because of semantics.
I don’t think we’re at risk of paralysis… actually this thread has been moving along quite quickly with strong support and engagement.
The issue to me is that NFT is a technology with many use cases. It doesn’t make sense to limit ourselves to just 1 NFT pie any more than it makes sense for us to limit to just 1 ERC20 pie or 1 crypto pie. The PFP collectible space is distinct from gaming and other NFT use cases, and is attracting enough investment to warrant its own product with diversified holdings to track that trend.
For the name, I prefer $PFP to $PIC. PFP is a well used term for this type of NFT project, so I think it will be more immediately recognizable.
I meant paralysis regarding PLAY and his scope more than the process on this specific proposal.
I don’t mind having a different pie containing NFTs such as PFP, I’m just not sure we should remove them from PLAY.
Hi everyone, we got a lot of great input on this proposal. To keep things moving, I suggest the following steps:
- Review the proposed allocations in the new “Pie baking” tab here.
- Initiate a Snapshot vote to indicate community support for the creation of a PFP pie with the proposed allocations, leaving some limited discretion to adjust allocations depending on #3 below (ETA: Sep 1 - Sep 5)
- [Optional] separate proposal to establish a Pie Working Group to plan the launch, explore partnerships, and drive initial growth of the pie (ETA: Sep 6 - Sep 10)
- [Optional] separate proposal to follow @gabo’s lead and establish a prospectus for PFP to define how we will maintain PFP after launch.
If the initial vote passes (#2) then we can begin development in parallel with #3 and #4, and aim for a launch in mid-September, pending dev team prioritization (cc @Adrian.A).
Check this out folks: Floor Perps - Paradigm
Very cool. Thanks for sharing. I like that the author supports our approach to use NFTX and NFT20 products as the underlying assets. It’s clear there will soon be a whole ecosystem of NFT-related investment products and PFP has a chance to be a big part of that.
I echo this sentiment, let’s get baking friends! :3
thanks @jnova for working on this. Few comments
- One point requiring confirmation asap is the existence of security audits on the nft20.io code, if planned to include them. Checking on their Discord. Happy to quickly reassess the allocation based on the confirmation above.
- Pending 1, I’d be in favour of kickstarting with a snapshot vote to sense the community support on this, while in parallel moving on with points 3 & 4.
- Pie Working Group definition, since it may still require some work + candidates
- Prospectus definition, since it would rather decline the rebalancing rules, while consolidating the inclusion criteria outlined above.
Confirmed no audit for nft20.io, I would amend the allocation above accordingly, postponing the discussion on their inclusion to a future moment.
Following up on few points.
- We’ve been updating the asset tracker to include few additional assets under assessment (BGAN, KITTY, PURR) and recomputing the inclusion criteria checklist on all assets.
Overall, 13 assets qualified for inclusion in PFP. Here below a recap of projects assessed
Here the resulting allocation
NOTE: The allocation methodology proposed includes a boosting element factoring in for each project its history (number of days since launch).
- Here a draft of prospectus for PFP
@jnova you’re planning to Launch mid-September, yet I don’t see an open vote. Are we holding this for any reason?
Also, we need to discuss dev availability prior to launch, so lets do that on Discord
Thanks for the nudge Adrian.
The snapshot will go live shortly: Snapshot
Hi all, founder of Winter Bears and long time pie lover here.
Winter Bears is a new PFP, but we have seen explosive growth with 4.4k owners in just a couple weeks.
We have also founded Art Club, an independent organization that is community led and aspires to be a full DAO. The mandate for Art Club is to engage a powerful community to be incentivized to provide value in DeFi and NFT protocols.
With this said, I would like to propose that Art Club formally partners with PieDAO to manage and market this PFP index.
By utilizing the united power of 4,4k passionate NFT investors I believe PFP pie could become a leading PieDAO product alongside PLAY and BCP.
If the PieDAO community wishes to see a market-relevant and effectively marketed product, the Art Club community would be the ideal candidate.
In exchange for this service a KPI token attached to a set bounty determined by the PieDAO community would be requested. The KPI token would be redeemable for a variable percentage of the bounty allocated, in accordance with the percentage of goal.
I would suggest TVL as the KPI to track. The KPI would be a synthetic built using the UMA protocol, underpinned by ETH.
Would love to hear feedback on this proposal and get this pie off the ground!
I think it’s a wonderful idea, I see a complete fit, and I love that more proposals using UMA KPI options are coming out.
So how will it look like? Could you roughly outline the main initiatives and activities you will be carrying on?
As I see it there are two key components:
- Producing a premium product with the expertise and nuance of the Art Club community
- Putting the powerful community (4.4k holders) to work to effectively market the product across their NFT network
Consensus around allocation will be reached via community discussion and verified off-chain voting.
Marketing can be kickstarted and reignited with regular campaigns across a variety of mediums, from meme contests, video guides, and artistic creativity contests. The Art Club community ahs already showcased amazing creative talent!
All these efforts will be underpinned by each and every participant knowing their actions will increase the value of their KPI token!
Hi Nushi! I wanna say, the bears are cute! But I do have some questions for everyone regarding this.
As far as I can tell, Art Club membership is restricted to people that own a Winter Bear. What happens to members of PieDAO that don’t have liquidity for a bear at the moment or simply aren’t interested in buying one? Winter Bears has a 0.61 ETH floor right now, so access to Art Club effectively costs ~$2100, which is pretty steep, especially if you’re only doing it do be able to have some say in PieDAO’s product.
Secondly, do we know how many people that hold a Winter Bear would actually be active in this kind of governance? I think the 4.4k number is coming from the unique owners of Winter Bears, but that doesn’t mean that all of them will have the expertise to maintain the pie or the interest in doing so. I’m wondering what those numbers would actually look like when it comes to pie-related votes. I understand that the KPI options are supposed to keep everyone motivated but it could also easily become a small group of people from an already selective set of users. After all, there are >6000 addresses that hold DOUGH, and all of them theoretically should want to have some say in decisions that PieDAO makes, but only 63 addresses voted on the the snapshot to create $PFP.
Also, even if all 4.4k people who hold a Winter Bear participate in every vote, is that necessarily what we want here? I personally like this kind of approach to use the wisdom of the crowd but in the original proposal for pie working groups, the idea was that it would be 2 to 4 people plus a team lead. I could see that number being bigger for maintaining the PFP pie since it feels like there’s 10 new projects coming out a day but we do need to make a decision on whether this will be a small closed group that is agreed on by the DAO or a group that has thousands of people that someone can buy their way into.
Lastly, I can appreciate the idea that someone who owns a PFP nft would probably have more insight on the space and be better prepared to help keep the pie on track, but I don’t think that restricting it to people that own NFTs from one specific 10k project does PieDAO any favors. If we decide to go with the large group route, what if the working group would consist of PFP holders + Art Club? If we want to go with a small working group, what if Art Club internally nominated a few people that would be be joined by some people nominated from the PieDAO side?
Sorry my thoughts aren’t super well organized here, but happy to talk through any of this.