A governance question for GreatestLARP.com

At Liscon, the moonshot collective launched http://greatestlarp.com/ - a coordination game about coordination games. In this game, the main character is leading us through each of the 5 levels, starting with level 1 - where you can read about The Greatest LARP in Comic book form, level 2-4 which are NFT auctions, and level 5 which is the “you win” level. The game starts with “Moloch is winning” and ends with “the good guys win”. The whole point of the game is the community has to coordinate to win the game.

Read more about the game mechanics here in this twitter thread. Or checkout this video of Kevin announcing this game on stage here

Here’s what the levels look like:

Level 2 is an NFT auction on a bonding curve. Here’s how to play according to the copy on the site.

Moloch is made of coordination failures, and the only way to beat a monster like that … is more coordination.

ETHBots are built to coordinate. They are configured by the community they serve to create coordination. They are the vessels through which humanity coordinates to defeat Moloch.

To play this level, launch a new hero into the world by minting their NFT. Once 200 Digital ETHBots are minted (155 minted so far), and 3 Statue ETHBots are minted(4 minted so far), humanity can begin its fight against Moloch.

OK so TLDR - once 200 ETHBots are minted, then the community can get to the next level. Awesome, we’re 76% there right?

Well… if you look at the price function on the level, youll see that the price grows exponentially over time as more units are sold.

Lets zoom in on where the community is now, at 155 units sold:

Looks like the current price for one of these ETHBots is 1.34 ETH, and the price will increasing to 6.6 ETH by the time 200 bots are minted.

Will the community want too pay 1-6.6 ETH per NFT for the next 45 NFTs in order to beat the level?

womp womp womp

Well, thats a great question. And thats why the community built in a mechanism we call the “womp womp” mechanism. The “womp womp” mechanism reduces the price by 10%. Checkout the code here. We call it womp womp because we think using the mechanism sounds like a sad trombone.

Here’s what the price curve looks like with 1 womp womp.

and here’s what itd look like if womp womp’s were applied every few days, but the community still purchased the NFTs every few days too.

TLDR: This mechanism is effectively a way to counter-balance the upward pressure of the price curve. It is a release valve in case the curve is too steep.

How do we use it?

Which leaves us with the question: should we use it? if so, how should we use it?

We’d like to leave that question up to governance - at least getting rough consensus on how it should be used.

To ground the discussion in the goals of the GreatestLARP project (and of broader GitcoinDAO, these are the stated goal of the project

  1. spread the message as far and wide as possible
  2. raise money for public goods.

So far so good on both fronts, the project has raised $180k in funding for public goods and the comic has been read 100s of times.

Some options for how the DAO proceeds on using “womp womp”:

  1. don’t use it at all. if the community doesnt consume the NFTs on current price curve, don’t pass the level. don’t meet moloch.
  2. use it whenever there is not a sale for 24 hours.
  3. use it whenever there is not a sale for 7 days.
  4. some other proposal (pls comment below)

We could use the womp womp during a Twitter space and do a few “discount rounds”, one at the start of the twitter space, one or two in the middle and then an open call for everyone to shill it for 4 more hours after which we would stop the womp womp.


I support the idea of using it (the womp womp) during a community live event.

Moonshot Collective’s community call seems like a perfect opportunity!

I’m happy to host another hype stage on Discord too, the launch day vibes were awesome and we convinced at least one statue purchaser to step up (thank you!).

My only concern is that we might demoralize past and future buyers into thinking we’ll always be ready to undercut pricing and they’d be incentivized to wait and see instead of jumping in.

I would favour announcing it (like we have here :slight_smile: ) and committing to only using it at certain preannounced events.


My only concern is that we might demoralize past and future buyers into thinking we’ll always be ready to undercut pricing and they’d be incentivized to wait and see instead of jumping in.

I do think it’s important to have a clear and predictable policy for this reason.


To me, using objective criteria to trigger the womp womp is preferable. In particular I like based on lack of sales (no sales in x timeframe = y% mint price reduction). Feels more blockchainy for one thing, but also gives us predictable events we can use to spread the project.

1 Like

I’m all for using the womp womp to incentivise more sales during twitter spaces or discord calls. I see it as another form of coordination. Sharing the story of enabling this strategy to keep prices down so we all can come together is an interesting narrative in and of itself.

Personally I won’t feel discouraged by keeping prices around what I paid. I actually didn’t know the price was going to go up at first and then really regretting not getting up
off the couch with the dogs to go get my bot sooner. Hahah but it’s all good I wanted to support public goods and I got a bot I love.

Point being I think as long as people keep buying in and we move forward in the mission together that is the most encouraging thing. Promos during discord calls or twitter spaces is totally fair game and will just continue raising awareness for the project. It will be the strength of the community that gives the project value ultimately.

1 Like

Womp womp time!

I agree it could be fun to do the first one during a community call. Then trigger another every 24 hours if a bot is not sold (or perhaps more often).

Excitement is growing, but it could fade fast. This system will play out again on level 3 leading to a LARP that takes weeks or more. That’s a long time in crypto.

1 Like

Just like the tip.party brings people to meetings I think the Womp Womp will bring people to sales. I like option #2.

Things happen fast and if no sales in a day…things don’t look good.

seems like people are coalescing around this as the path forward.

perhaps the womp womp can be the same time every day to create consistency/predictability

EDIT: i may also suggest allowing 2 womp womps per 24 hours, as in season 3 the curve is much more steep much faster


nice idea …I propose to it, keep it up.

The community call idea is great

1 Like

Hi @owocki I’m in favor of using the womp womp twice every 24 hours. I think the benefits of raising more funding for public goods outweighs the negative externalities of influencing the bonding curve and corresponding prices. As a Bot holder myself, I’m supportive of this approach, thanks!

1 Like

I think option 2 will help sustain momentum and help us reach a threshold where we can move ahead more reasonably.

Comic creator here. I am all for multiple womp womps a day! Three or four.

Sers, I propose we WOMP WOMP immediately. Then we pay Steve Aoki to do a cameo saying WOMP WOMP. Fomo ensues and the coordination of ETHbots will surely hit power levels over 9000 to defeat Moloch. Option 2 is also nice.


I also really like that idea, the community calls usually bring in a decent amount of exposure.

I support using a wompwomp if there are no sales on the last 24hs, althought i also like the idea of using it on special events, such as twitter spaces or conferences.

Womp Womps could not kick in until prices reach a certain level.

Hey all, its hard to parse the responses in freeform. Can you please vote on this poll?

After 36 hours Ill plan to close the poll + we can institute the policy.

  • No womp/womps
  • 1 womp/womp every 24h with no sales
  • 2 womp/womp every 24h with no sales
  • 3 womp/womp every 24h with no sales

0 voters

  • Do it at the same time every day.
  • Do it on community calls + communicate those ahead of time.
  • Both.

0 voters