Distributing Bolt's rewards to small cap gems

Summary:

What if we distribute the rewards that was meant for bolt across all the small cap gems.
This is to piggyback the thread listed below.

Abstract:

Bolt needs to be removed from getting any of the rewards. What if we spread the ZWAP percentage from bolt to all the other small cap gems in Zilliqa.

Motivation:

This way we do not violate the current lightning proposal, but also give a fair shot to the true projects on the Zilliqa network. This will give room to expand on the idea listed in the link below for season 2.

Specification:

I did not calculate the math yet, but I would like to hear opinions.

For:
For distributing bolt’s ZWAP rewards to other small cap tokens.

Against:
Against distributing bolt’s ZWAP rewards to other small cap tokens.
Poll:

  • For
  • Against

0 voters

Can we please just move forward with LIP-1 the way it was originally written?

The only amendment I support is removal of Bolt. That is only because Bolt did some seriously unethical stuff.

We don’t need to pump these small tokens. That’s all you’re doing by literally handing them zwap is contributing to an artificial pump. Instead, let them work hard from the ground up and earn a spot like everyone else.

5 Likes

Well the issue is if we remove bolt, what will happen with the rewards that was meant for bolt? LIP-1 is a mess, and this is a possible solution to correct what was done.

They will be split between ZLP and Port - The only other two contenders …

I truly believe that if we start handing out free money to these super new projects before they’re ready it’s going to be bad for them and ZIL in the long run. New people will come in just to try and make a quick Buck, get hurt, and leave zil forever.

3 Likes

Well REDC and BARTER are legitimate projects in the Zilliqa ecosystem. We can divide it up between the 4 pools, wouldn’t you think? The requirement has to be that they have a working product in the Zilliqa ecosystem.

1 Like

Not saying that they aren’t legitimate projects. I just don’t believe in hand outs. Let them win the portion of the vote needed to secure a spot.

1 Like

I wouldn’t say they are handouts, but the results would have been different without bolt. So its hard to say what would have been the end result if bolt was not included. Thats why I wanted to open this up for discussion on how we divide up the rewards that were meant for bolt.

I doubt the results would’ve been much different without bolt. The majority of bolt votes were probably by the bolt devs who bought up zwap in order to vote. Which means that without bolt most of those votes would not have existed. Poll numbers wouldve been similar. Only difference is zwap wouldn’t have gone up so high before the snapshot.

Again its hard to say, we do not know who are the true wallet holders. I would like to hear other opinions.

Send it back to the other 3 incentivized tokens… PERIOD.

With out the votes in bolt none would have got in as the quorum wouldn’t have been met.

Yeah, that is definitely a concern. What are your thoughts about the situation?

Stick to the rules. Unallocated rewards should be redistributed to the elected tokens in this category, i.e. ZLP and Port

Voting rules

To be voted into the programme, a token has to garner at least 15% of the total votes casted in this proposal to qualify.

If there are no 5 tokens with at least 15% of the total votes at the end of the voting period, the remaining unallocated rewards will be redistributed to the elected tokens in this category.

1 Like

Hey guys, I appreciate the enthusiasm with the governance process but let us move the discussion here to Removal of BOLT token from Lightning Liquidity Mining programme - #54 by Snowsledge.

I will be closing this topic.