Oho, thank you, I will try
I was originally supportive and trying to find a solution to make this happen but after the bullying and behavior(see discord) I figured it is not worth the work to try to go through and find a path to get tokens to certain people who might have qualified. I am of the opinion that broadening the base of token holders is a good thing as long as all have some type of authentic interest in the project. However this behavior does not signal authentic interest in the project but greed that goes so far as to hurt the DAO if their demands go ungranted. It seems clearer now that most are more concerned about getting their free tokens vs. the actual well being of the project hence the threats of legal action and retaliation if they don’t get what they want.
We should not endorse this behavior by voting yes and we certainly shouldn’t pay out of the treasury or go out of our way to using up the teams time and effort to onboard these types of actors.
4 Likes
As investor, I’m seriously worried about this issue. I hope won’t be a SEC investigation.
Why the main guides about airdrop didn’t reported the date of deadline?
Why 50% of eligible people on Gnosis chain didn’t claim their token?
I don’t believe that the DAO is so rigid and stubborn that is not able to find a compromise. Otherwise I fear that many investors will sell their cow.
1 Like
I said it before on discord, not everyone lives the same life under the same conditions. Everyone’s situation is quite different.
Token holders say that those who do not receive their airdrops are not relevant enough and no longer deserve it. The main reason they say this is because there is a 10% chance that the value of their bags will drop.
I myself suffered from covid heavily, I was in the intensive care unit for 4 weeks, and for 3 weeks before that, my disease gradually worsened, I was unable to do anything.
Forget me, a community member may have lost a loved one, mother or father. may have had a traffic accident, or any other accident.
he may have had surgery for anything, he may be in the process of recovery.
6 weeks is a very long time for people who have no real job, no real problems, and it’s true on their own terms that those who haven’t received their airdrops think they don’t deserve it.
I have received many airdrops before. some of them gave rights in a very long time period, some of them 1 week.
however, I see that developers and investors do not trust their products, afraid of “selling pressure” as the time gets shorter. and they are right not to trust because the shorter the airdrop period, the sooner the token disappears by making hype.
uniswap is an airdrop with no date for the claim.
ens gave 6 months
anchor has no deadline.
These tokens still exist. Have you seen an investor worried for those who haven’t claimed the ens airdrob yet?
you can’t see it because the protocol is “strong” enough
I am one of the first to use cow. I used it with great pleasure, recommended it to people on my telegram channel and discord. Since gas prices were high at that time, I could only refer to 12 people.
However, if a protocol takes away my right to vote because my 6-week period has passed, and says to me “if you love us, you can buy it from the market”, I will not use that protocol and I will not recommend it to anyone.
I hope the core community will not be manipulated by the bagholders, and I want what is rightfully given to us.
respects
1 Like
You can always request professional legal advice to clear your mind.
That’s incorrect, 32.6% of airdrop didn’t get claimed on Gnosis => https://dune.xyz/queries/421368/1021580
As you can see in this post, there’s some concerns about all the legal obligations CowDAO needs to respect in order to consider reopening any vCOW claim. Things changed since the claim ended, vCOW changed (Snapshot).
1 Like
This graph shows a different outcome, it seems that only the 50.2% of tokens on GC have been claimed. A lot of people missed to claim on GC
Although token holders see this as a possibility of dumping, it shows the deterioration of their relationship with the community.
I’ve never used sushiswap, I use uniswap if I can because it airdropped me.
I refer people to ENS to get their own name domains.
I refer those who want to get interest on their dollars to Anchor. etc.
I see here that token holders are afraid of the price will dump.
ENS has opened a 6 month window and still more than 25% have not even claimed their tokens.
there is nothing to fear here, it will only increase penetration.
I don’t think the airdrop hunters missed it in this 6 week window.
Those of us with normal lives, jobs, but also crypto interests - real community members - just missed out.
The high claim rate in ethereum shows this.
2 Likes
This is a fundamentally unserious. People being in favor of this proposal are members of the DAO and early supporters, not “malicious actors”.
A better comparison would be of a family investing in a house, and then, having missed a poorly communicated deadline, trying to find a solution that benefits everyone.
Like my proposal to entitle the claimers to only the investment option. That way you shouldn’t worry about the claimers diluting your value.
1 Like
That pie chart is counting everything (title: Total Claimed Proportion) and the options claim (not airdrop, not free) on gnosis (for small investors) are in fact very low. 86.3% of the GNO Options didn’t get bought and 63% Eth Options didn’t get bought. Options window was even smaller and no one did complain until they saw price on market was higher than the price investors paid.
Like I said before…
I totally agree with this. lots of people and bots sell their communities token and it can affect the future of the project. we are hodling our governance tokens.
1 Like
I lost 20 minutes on this thread and I can’t figure out what the problem is. If there was a technical error, then I support the proposal. However, if someone forgot to claim airdrop and then blames poor communication then it is sad.
5 Likes
I think its a poor way to use devs time re assembling a airdrop that was fairly given for those who paid attention. if it was 1 week i may agree but 6 weeks is a lifetime in crypto. I highly disagree with this proposal
4 Likes
No reopening for latecomers. Or lock 1-4 year like investors, but no less.
1 Like
I think this is a fair proposal. Who believes in the project and just missed out will be happy to hold for some time.
1 Like
is it possible to recalculate the old accounts and give them a chance to collect tokens from the old aidrop again in the new contract? I made over 50 swaps myself with a turnover of over 150k but I found out about the aidrop too late. I think that for skillful programmers it is possible to convert those accounts which were credited to aidrop but did not receive them and give this chance in the future
I don’t understand why to make such limits. If someone deserves an award, why shouldn’t they get it? Not everyone is a bounty hunter and doesn’t follow everything 24/7. Especially if he/she only engages in good projects and has other tasks on his/her mind and does not sit on Twitter all the time. I feel disadvantaged. I would even buy tokens for the price in the presale
2 Likes
Hello, I have been a long time supporter of POA, Xdai, GNO and then COW of course.
Very humiliated when I was told that I am not deserving enough for the airdrop because I missed the deadline
I followed the whole discussion from announcement of Cow airdrop until the enabling of transferability.
For some reason, I didn’t understand that the deadline for transferability of vCow also meant that it was the deadline for claiming it.
I have significant investment into GNO which rolls back into the very early days (POA) I have followed barinov. I have marketed it since the beginning and have followed tweets and news for years. I have cheered for a huge variety of ethereum projects, told my online friends, discussed ideas and @'ed directly with many prominent people.
I value my opsec, I don’t want to share addresses or have common name across websites, forums, discord and TGs. That doesn’t make me any less of a contributor.
I have a ton of things to do and projects to follow in my daily life. I don’t know why 6 weeks is considered “sufficient” and why we must be punished for missing out a key deadline? Why should we be ousted if we missed it? If we deserved it in the first place, we deserve it now.
I still admit it was my weakness but I hope you can empathize with it. Defi gets complicated. Yes, we missed it. I am willing to lock my airdrop for a few months. I am not interested in options, just want my airdrop. Anybody that thinks I don’t deserve it should return their own too.
That said, I wish you guys do the fair thing. And please don’t bully people for being late. Thanks
2 Likes
Noone has been bullied for “being late”. Nobody thinks you are “undeserving by missing a DL”.
What’s done, is done. Accept our apologies for having your feelings hurt.
I would be obliged if the group of people “who feel missing out” rn would return the courtesy of accepting the DAOs decision, however it will conclude. That also means, that a “No.” as response is to be respected, too.
3 Likes
Sorry, in my opinion, there is no way you can justify denying an extension.
You can (and will) disagree though. That is all
I also miss some airdrops and I know how painful it is but we need to ask one question: “Why deadline exists?”. If the airdrop has a purpose to transfer governance rights to community members then it is very clear why people who were late or did not know about the airdrop simply do not deserve governance rights. If someone has not paid attention to the protocol for 2-3 months, will that person be active in the governance process?
When one of us misses an airdrop we understand it as a big financial loss just because the token is liquid in the market. The only correct perspective is one of protocol that launch airdrop and the most important question is what the team/DAO wanted to achieve with that. Personally, I am against such airdrops and I think that every token allocation should have a vesting period which can be claImable after user engagement. If such a similar retroactive allocation is proposed, I might support it, but I am against allocation in exchangeable CoW token.
1 Like
Any update yet? It’s been a while. We need to put forward a formal vote asap