DRAFT LIP-5 Genesis Utility

New Proposal Discussion
1

Proposal #: 5

Title: DRAFT LIP-5 Establishes Genesis V1 Ethlizard NFT Utility
Author: KakashiSama
Date Created: 12th April 2022
This vote is to implement the utility of Genesis V1 Ethlizard NFTs as detailed below:

ABSTRACT
After the LizardDAO was formed with V2 Ethlizard NFTs serving as the governance token, Genesis V1 (Gen V1) Ethlizard NFT holders were told by the Ethlizard team that their NFT would gain additional utility at some point in the future, with no details or promises being made.

This document proposes a change to include the Genesis V1 Ethlizard NFTs into the LizardDAO as a 1 to 1 equal to the V2 Ethlizards NFT in regards to receiving equal voting power and staking benefits, as well as the same DAO royalty agreements and percent. (Staking reward multipliers are part of voting option)


Relevant Information:

Genesis V1 Ethlizard
Ethlizards Genesis V1 was created as a meme NFT collection to be distributed among friends and OG degens of the Illuvium community by 0xDrs. It was a free mint given out and the Lizard Lounge discord server was formed for these degens to connect and share alpha. Currently Genesis Ethlizards collection has 0% royalty, $0 revenue and 0 in treasury. The Ethlizard team has only recently acquired the rights to this collection.

Ethlizard Genesis V1 Holder Perks:
• Pre-V2 mint, holders received 2 free mints of Ethlizards V2 and 3 WL spots for the mint [additionally there were 3 extra WL spots available for early members to discord for a maximum possible 8 V2 NFTs to a single wallet]
• Have special discord role for access to a few closed Iguana (Gen V1) only channels on discord
• Collector/Flex value (speculative)

Genesis V1 holders have retained access to Lizard Lounge discord and continue to be an active, loyal and valuable part of the community. Gen V1 is considered an important part of the Ethlizard history and some utility is due to holders.

Presently the 100 Genesis V1 NFT has limited functionality and has no smart contract permissions within the LizardDAO, which currently consists of 5050 V2 Ethlizard NFTs. The LizardDAO is contractually restricted to V2 Ethlizard NFT holders, with the token being granted smart contract permissions to participate in the DAO (voting, staking or otherwise).

V2 Ethlizard
V2 Ethlizards was not planned at the time of Genesis creation. Ethlizards V2 is a somewhat separate collection created by the current Ethlizards team. It was created to become a larger, functional DAO project. The V2 Ethlizards 5050 tokens are contractually structured to have permissions within the DAO (including membership in the DAO by owning a V2 Ethlizard NFT token, voting, staking, future smart contract functionality and other DAO benefits). 7.5% Royalty goes to the vault and team. Currently has vault treasury of approximately 300ETH.


Recently has the Ethlizards team acquired the rights to the Gen V1 collection. There is no "automatic" inclusion possible, since from the beginning the DAO was developed for V2 holders only at a smart contract level. For Gen v1 to be included, this LIP-5 DAO proposal needs to be ratified and voted on according to the functional governance process of the DAO.

This proposal advocates for Ethlizard Genesis V1 NFTs to be integrated into the Ethlizard V2 collection, essentially expanding it to 5150 NFT merged collection where 1 liz = 1 liz. This proposal would allow the Gen V1 NFT to receive equal voting, staking, future utility and rewards; Additionally it would share the same agreements with the DAO and contribute to the DAO treasury in an equal manner as V2 NFTs. For NFT marketplaces, they would still be listed as two separate collections for the sake of simplicity (this could be changed later).

For clarity, the sole difference would be that Genesis V1 NFT holders would retain their exclusive Iguana discord role to the closed iguana-only channels.

Additional staking multipliers are also being voted on in this proposal.

Clarification on Staking Multipliers
The option of 2x or 3x multiplier being presented in this vote would apply to staking rewards only (i.e. Gen V1 holders would receive a larger portion of 2x or 3x of the staking pool total rewards than their V2 counterparts). In all other aspects, voting, future utility, airdrops, smart contract implementations, etc. the two Ethlizard NFTs of Gen V1 and V2 would be treated equally… If the vote ends in “1 to 1 integration with 1x staking reward,” then NO multiplier would be added (i.e. 100% equality).

Main changes

This proposal will seek to include the Ethlizard Genesis V1 NFTs as 1 to 1 equivalents to V2 Ethlizards NFTs in regards of DAO membership and smart contract functionality.

Genesis V1 NFTs would be integrated into the snapshot voting system to include voting privileges, 1 vote per NFT, same as the current V2 NFTs.

Genesis V1 NFTs would be integrated into the staking contracts to include equal staking priviledges and share per NFT of staking rewards, same as the current V2 NFTs. (If a vote result including a 2x or 3x multiplier passes, then this functionality for Gen V1 would carry an additional 2x or 3x staking weight.)

The royalty percent of Gen V1 on all NFT marketplaces would be changed to 7.5% to match the same royalty percentage as V2s. Any royalties earned will be sent to the LizardDAO (V2) treasury and follow the exact same protocol as V2 royalties.

Any future utility or benefits would be shared equally between the Gen V1 / V2 Ethlizard NFTs as a merged collection. This would include any future changes to voting, staking or other DAO and smart contract agreements.

All Gen V1 / V2 Ethlizard NFTs would henceforth be treated equal in the eyes of the DAO (aside from any ratified differences specifically defined in this proposal).

Implementation
The Ethlizards team would be responsible for implementing this change exactly as it would be written and agreed upon in the FINAL version of this proposal (that is voted on snapshot and labeled as FINAL proposal), updating the community on its progress and honoring the 1 to 1 Gen V1/V2 NFT equivalency in all future LizardDAO policies and proposals (with the exceptions of the Iguana discord role and any potential staking multiplier if approved in this proposal’s vote). The time and cost would be minimal and covered by the Ethlizard team. It would cost an estimated 2-3 eth to create the frontend bridge, deploy and create the 2 smart contracts. The timeline for this change will be integrated into the existing LizardDAO road map, with respect to any current projects or tasks that may command a higher priority or specific coordination (staking contracts, etc).

RATIONALE
As the LizardDAO was formed during V2 mint, the team did not own the rights, nor could they include the Genesis V1 holders at that time. This proposal is an attempt to rectify that in a way that also respects the rights and value of the V2 NFT holders. This proposal was written in a way to make the best effort to remove any of the author’s opinion or preference in favor of a DAO FIRST approach. This proposal was drafted to best suggest a potential fair middle-ground, bridge any gap that has been created by any debates over Gen V1 utility and move the DAO forward as one united, equal and dedicated unit.

This utility added to the Genesis V1 NFT can potentially increase its speculative market value in addition to the newly added voting and staking benefits.
V2 holders and subsequently the entire DAO will gain long-term value with a united collection and steps taken towards a unified DAO community.

Should the V2 LizardDAO integrate Ethlizard Genesis V1 NFTs in voting, staking and future shared utility?

Voting options:
A. No, we should not integrate them.
B. Yes, let’s integrate them as a 1 to 1 equivalent with 1x staking reward
C. Yes, let’s integrate them as a 1 to 1 equivalent with 2x staking reward
D. Yes, let’s integrate them as a 1 to 1 equivalent with 3x staking reward

Voting Calculation
Unless option A [No] is over 50%, then the [Yes…] option with the highest % of votes will be accepted between options B, C and D.

Author Comment:
This is a DRAFT for LIP-5. The community is encouraged to offer feedback. Revisions can be made before this would be submitted for final voting round. I also ask the Ethlizard team to please fact check the entire proposal.

13 Likes
2

Let’s move forward as one team, one family!

7 Likes
3

i’m proposing a 2x multiplier. one of the allocations go to the genesis holder. the second automatically goes to our official charity wallet.

this keeps genesis allocation per holder the same as v2.

but it boosts genesis utility into being a charitable flex/expanding the collective pie while enabling us do some good in the world. :lizard:

3 Likes
4

Very detailed proposal! definitely a good start. Thanks for putting this together.

Proposal Voting Options:

I think the proposal should give everyone the chance to vote on their preferred option, voting options with something like:

  1. 1x multiplier
  2. 2x multiplier
  3. 3x multiplier
  4. no integration

Multiplier (whether 1,2,3 or no integration) to apply to voting rights, once the outcome of this proposal happens either way I can’t see a clash of incentives between V2 and V1 to make this an issue?

Kieran has suggested / advocated for a multiplier a few times and i think we should give everyone a chance to vote on this as a result. Only a core group of people have voiced opinions so far in the forum & discord. Again just my two cents, while I think what Kieran suggested is the best way forward i’m happy with 1:1, I just want everyone to be able to vote on the option they want.

Feedback on Rationale for integration:

I think the whole genesis utility conversation is about much more than just the OG & current holders who made this project possible.

If instead of the Ethlizard DAO we were all shareholders in a traditional investment fund, I would likely agree with no integration on grounds of dilution, but we are (and want to continue to be) so much more than this & ultimately if we want to realise the vision of having lizard island, lizcoin, baby lizzies etc. becoming a success there has to be a pull to our ecosystem beyond just our portfolio of investments & clever economics - Genesis lizards are the origin lizards & the lore / story /meme combined with our future approach is a key factor here as loads of other DAOs can offer a good portfolio. This is why I think we need them front and center of our story. Origins drive values/principles; values/principles are ultimately the lens through which we should be viewing decisions such as this. All too often i see companies too quick to throw these aside without realising that these are a key driver of their DNA, allure and value.

There’s likely a better way of including this than the above, but I just think the utility question is more about the story & how we present ourselves as a whole than it is about just rewarding OGs etc.

5 Likes
5

I like your input and arguments a lot - although from my personal view it is even not about multipliers or not, but about creating a system of 2 Generations that logically complement each other (ok - I always bring the example of the 2 Godjira Gens up - so here we are again ;). Another point in this Gen discussion and “we” vs “them” is, that there are no closed systems of the Gens - everyone can buy Gen1 or 2 according to the market conditions and different prices for different Gens with different utilities sounds normal to me.

6

I like this suggestion a lot. It takes out the “greed” discussion + putting in place a constant stream of support for charity and our positive impact outside our Lizard investment cosmos.

8

My baseline view is that Kieran knows what he is doing and that if people disagree with him thats fine & healthy but we should all at least vote on what he suggests, and if the community disagrees with what he suggests we go from there.

What I suggested in terms of voting format in above may not be the best solution, but our starting point should include what he suggested as a minimum :slight_smile:

Even in his last message he was super clear that he felt a multiplier was the way to go. I just think we owe it to him to at least vote on what he thinks is best.

1 Like
12

Many community members have expressed their desire for a multiple choice or multiplier to be present in the proposal.

Though I have my personal reservations on multiple choice voting, I have followed up and had many discussions and researched further on multiple choice voting methodology and options available from Snapshot.

I have edited LIP-5 to be changed changed from a “yes/no” vote, to the four choices as follows:

A. No, we should not integrate them.
B. Yes, let’s integrate them as a 1 to 1 equivalent with 1x staking reward
C. Yes, let’s integrate them as a 1 to 1 equivalent with 2x staking reward
D. Yes, let’s integrate them as a 1 to 1 equivalent with 3x staking reward

Information about a potential multiplier was also added.

Aside from this, the rest of the proposal remains unchanged.

14

My opinion would to be structure the vote as the below multiple choice and take the largest vote. We should aim to to it today/tomorrow.

My reasoning is because these options are very standard and we can move quickly to the more exciting aspects of this project. We all know someone that has different opinions. This seems reasonable and straight-forward.

Should V2 integrate Genesis in both funding and voting?

  1. No, we should not integrate them.
  2. Yes, let’s integrate them at a 1x.
  3. Yes, let’s integrate them and give them 1x+.
2 Likes
15

Awesome proposal, I think we should move this to Prelim voting!

3 Likes
16

Everyone will notice that I have deleted a number of my own comments. This was done only to remove any confusion since I was restating various options, some of which conflicted with what is now currently in the edited version of the proposal.

For transparency the history of ALL of these deleted comments and EVERY edit made to every post is available for viewing if you click the orange pencil icon in each post. This also includes edits made to the actual proposal.

2 Likes
17

Great stuff Kakashi, thanks again for all your work. I just want to clarify something with the voting calculation. From what I understood from the proposal, if you have the following results:

A-49%
B-10%
C-21%
D-20%

Then Option C is voted because A didn’t get more than 50%. Is that correct? I just want to avoid any possible misunderstanding :slight_smile:

18

It would make sense that yes, in that case the vote passed and the multiplier with the most votes counts, although let’s see what he says!

19

Yep, exactly this.

There’s some limitations to Snapshot so this is the easiest way to make it under 1 proposal.

2 Likes
20

All good then ! Let’s make this vote happen!

1 Like
21

Awesome work @KakashiSama . I can only speak for myself, but I think you really deserve a big applause for this one and I really think that we need some official spokesmen in the community to structure our thoughts as you did.

Even if this was a topic I didn´t like to discuss at first, I have enjoyed all the debate and I agree that this is really the second perfect timing to implement these changes (the first perfect timing was before mint tho). I started from a non-inclusion perspective, I changed into 1 liz = 1 liz opinion, and now I´m thinking about a 2x multiplier option. The reason: I agree with @marmalade, I really like the lizards origins and the idea of driving the community through those values as one single team. Not everything is about price and profits. With a multiplier, and provided the origin, scarcity/rarity etc, I really beleive that genesis lizards can carry the project. Higher genesis interest will be good for the vault, will result in more exposure and higher V2 interest too. The only think I don´t like about this is that Anon whales can grab those genesis and become OGs with privileges. I would be fine if sales were limited to serious partners or big entities. But it is what it is, and each genesis owner is free to sell it at any price to anyone they want, market is free.

3 Likes
22

That is correct. For the sake of full transparency, I will break it down.

For the multiple choice FINAL proposal:
The idea being that that if at least half of the DAO doesn’t want Gen 1 integration at all and more than 50% votes A [No], then the proposal fails.

If more than 50% of DAO votes for integration, then their votes are counted amongst their primary preference of B, C or D and the one [Yes] with highest voting % wins.

This is defined by Snapshot as:
Single choice voting
Each voter may select a single choice to give his/her total voting power to.

There’s another snapshot option called Ranked choice voting (IRV Instant Runoff Voting) that I also considered, which is basically where lower % options get rolled in to support another option. This was recommended by @Animositas (who has a Master’s in Game Theory).

To be honest, I felt a little more drawn to IRV, but I have little experience with voting systems - certainly not enough to make any kind of informed decision on behalf of the DAO. In the end, after more than half a day spent researching voting mechanisms, talking to other DAO members and a long discussion with @dupree, I edited the proposal to include Dupree’s suggestion of multiple choices with a “Single Choice Voting” mechanism. He explained it’s what they currently use for other LizardDAO votes (Yes/No/Abstain). This is arguably the only section of the proposal with someone’s opinion directly influencing the content, however as it is the currently used voting mechanism of the LizardDAO and Dupree is part of the founding team, it felt right to follow his call on which voting mechanism to use. The remainder of the proposal in it’s entirety could be considered written on behalf of the DAO, with me serving as a ghostwriter so to speak.

Voting mechanisms:
Video: Which voting system is the best? - Alex Gendler - YouTube
reference: Voting types - Snapshot

3 Likes
23

Perfectly clarified, thanks. Although I also tend to think IRV seems more appropriate, I am in the same boat and wouldn’t push for it on such a dividing issue. As long as the rules are clear, as you detailed them, then everybody should accept whatever decision that comes out of this proposal.
People, if you really really don’t agree with that setup, just don’t vote and hope it doesn’t reach quorum.
Let’s find some room in the future for democratic experiment !
But first let’s get that ball rolling. It’s time

2 Likes
24

Well thought out and very clear Kakashi. Thank you again for helping to merge all of the conflicting feedback into a meaningful proposal. I feel like most everything that could be said has been at this point and look forward to moving forward for our next big steps as a unified liz fam. Wen vote?

4 Likes
25

I want clarification on how the multiplier would work. Would holding more than a single v1 lizard further increase the multiplier? i.e. the multiplier is 2x, I hold 4 v1 lizards, do I get 2x the allocation or do I get 8x the allocation?

Oh it now seems obvious to me that each v1 lizard is just bigger, not a multiplier for the wallets entire allocation. My bad.