Quite simply, we should not be extending the deadline for the airdrop. Reasons:
Terms were set forth in the lite paper prior to launch. Moving away from this betrays trust. If we can’t trust this, what can we trust? Is the entire white paper up for changes at any moment? Trust is one of the most important aspects of a project this early. Let’s not make a knee jerk movement and betray that.
There’s no reason to extend. The ledger works. Many have reported using it successfully.
People made financial decisions based on this information. Some willing to take on the airdrop and dilution, knowing it would end on March 9. Moving away from this creates a bad taste for those who stepped in early and took risk.
Edit: thank you to the devs for considering all viewpoints and keeping the airdrop ending on March 9, as the paper said and the community is in favor of.
Connor, I believe this is not your choice to make
I fully agree, also airdrop extension should be something the ENTIRE community votes for (or against) and the Decision should be based on the outcome of that Vote.
i’m not against the airdrop extension per se, but the numbers are really off if I understand correctly.
10x the circulating supply is it?
airdrop a coupon so that who’s eligible can only have their png by providing some token to a pool, having the png equivalent “sponsored” and having their provided liquidity blocked for 30 days. everybody wins
This proposal could read “Abide by the stated airdrop deadline” which shouldn’t be controversial.
I’ve been thinking about airdrops in general recently, and they don’t really incentive liquidity. It is too late now, but I would have much preferred allocating that airdrop fund to instead buff the liquidity mining rewards for the first month or X period of time. This would have brought about early adoption AND incentivized providing liquidity AND holding assets. All of which would be great for Pangolin
Air drops are not great, and the incentives are badly aligned where, the recipient can simply “dump”.
Aligning rewards with miners (who have real skin in the game with capital tied up in the product as liquidity) is a more sensible approach. Any UNISWAP or SUSHISWAP or other AMM participant can just as easily move assets through the bridge to take part and not get an instant reward that can be exited.
In that vein, my view is that the airdrop to previous AMM users on other platforms is actually against the very notion of “community” since it only preferentially benefits at best a “part” of the community.
We shouldn’t extend any deadlines, and in fact we shouldn’t be doing them at all
Dams I read that aridrop would end March 10th??
Hello everybody. I came across your project thanks to a major crypto influencer. Unfortunately the deadline of this airdrop wasn’t really clear firstly because your project was widely discovered around 20th-25th of February by various crypto-influencers and crypto-news websites and secondly because here in the governance forum there isn’t a specific post with the deadline or with an announcement of the Pangolin launch. I understand from the litepaper you clarified it and everything was as expected but still from a communication point of view I planned on investing and studying Pangolin while waiting a bit for fees to be reasonably low and it wasn’t really clear when was the airdrop going to end. I now discover that the airdrop ended weeks before I thought. Certainly my fault but certainly you didn’t make it very clear. It’s a pity, I think this project has great potentials and I would have taken the chance to study and invest in it since it should be truly decentralized or anyway going in the right direction. As for now, I’ll wait for lower fees or look elsewhere.
From a technical perspective I trying using ledger when I first discovered the project but it wasn’t working properly. That is why I took sometime to try claiming and using the bridge and exchange.
Finally, I don’t really understand the concept of airdropping for a time or for a so limited time. IMHO It seems more like a welcome bonus from a betting website than a true investment incentive. From an investment point of view this is a minus point for me (that doesn’t mean there aren’t a lot of positive ones). I would have expected a better consideration for uniswap and sushi early adopters and liquidity providers as it happened for other projects. A better incentive would have been just to use the Pangolin project which is anyway a learning curve that proves an interesting in studying a possibly using it from now on. Anyway, even if I’m a bit disappointed I’m going to study this project in time and I think it could have great potentials. I wish you the best.