Season 1 was a wild ride with some ups and downs. One major hiccup was the Gold distribution, where some projects like District One and Blaze really dropped the ball. We need to rethink how we hand out Gold to make sure it goes to the right places.
Here are a few ideas:
Stricter Criteria for Dapps:
• Let’s be more selective about which Dapps receive Gold. Implementing stricter criteria and regular checks will help ensure that only the most deserving projects get rewarded.
Staking for Voting:
• We could implement a system where $BLAST holders can stake their tokens to gain voting power on which Dapps should receive Gold. This will give the community a direct say in the distribution process, as suggested by Bobby Big Yield.
Improved Transparency:
• We need to be more open about the distribution process. Regularly publishing detailed reports on Gold allocation and the criteria used will help build trust and accountability within the community.
I’d love to hear your thoughts and suggestions on these ideas and let’s work together to make Gold great again!
I really like these ideas.
I think we should talk more about them and refine them.
Suggestion of some criteria:
App sends a part of their tokens to be locked with the possibility of being taken from them and given to users in case of misbehavior.
App locks and vests team tokens and liquidity for a fair amount of time (1 year, for example).
Apps does not present signs of bot behavior / has a low % on sibyl analysis.
For example, concerning the voting power, we would have to build something to forbid sibyls and also to restrict the whale power over votings, given the own app or its collaborators could vote for the app with a lot of blast in their wallets.
Maybe all apps should have a page where they layout the gold distribution metrics and processes, and also if they are entitled to make changes in the gold distribution and with how much time in advance. I think they should not be allowed to make changes in the gold distribution. And I also think that it could be interesting if a third party could be hired to audit every gold distribution from every project and keep sure the system is not being corrupted by the project itself or by sibyls. The money to hire could come from a submissions process in which the apps which want to receive gold should pay a fee to be directed to the third party audit company. The audit company should provide daily or weekly data for the entire system. Maybe a part of the tokens of the project should be locked, to be taken away and given as compensation to users, in case fraudulent behavior or change in the distribution system is observed.
