Discussion: What should the gitcoin community multisig do with the donated AKITA

Hello, it is I, cupojoseph. I have worked for gitcoin (back in 2018), contributed to the platform, spent tens of thousands of dollars donating to grants and funding work on the platform, and got my very first eth ever on Gitcoin shortly after it launched. I consider myself very involved, and the long term success of gitcoin is deeply important to me.

I hold these truths to be self evident:

  1. Gitcoin community and the world of funding public goods + open source does not owe anything to the akita community. 0 of this was donated by the akita community, and 0 of it would have made it here if it were just up to them.
  2. These funds were removed from liquidity before being sent to gitcoin, where the akita community thought they would stay to increase their ability to dump.
  3. Gitcoin community will not benefit long term by becoming an akita connected product, which will likely happen if these funds are held for long.
  4. The goal of the gitcoin community is to fund open source sustainably in a way that has never been possible before.
  5. The goal of the akita community is a pyramid scheme to make token price increase as more people buy in… and memes
  6. these goals have competing interests whether or not we are willing to admit it.

with these in mind, the goals of the gitcoin multisig wallet members should be to turn as much AKITA into ETH and DAI, in order to fund open source and public goods, as fast as possible while extracting as much value as possible. A 98% dump right now does not extract as much value as we can so that should be mostly ruled out. However, we the members of gitcoin ( who have been honestly building a more transparent financial system and other non-meme-pyramid-scheme based crypto projects on gitcoin for years now) do not owe the akita community anything, and should not hold these coins for very long with the reasoning that dumping will hurt them somehow.

One plan to extract as much value from this for open source and public good funding:

  • dump some small percentage now, maybe not more than would crash the price by 10-20%
  • create a lending pool on CREAM and lend as much as possible out for DAI and ETH
  • use these funds to buy equity in Gitcoin the company (not the community) back from consensys and VCs
  • sell in non-dex places where there may be less slippage: OTC, gnosis auctions, and back to akita community
  • create akita yield farm to increase liquidly again and dump more over time
  • Set hard goals of not holding any significant amount for more than 6 months

Edit: re Akita team members asking us to hold a percentage of the coins.

This is just dishonest. Your project’s website clearly describes itself as “inspired by elon musk, little brother of dogecoin, meme-based”
I’m not against holding a small percentage in good faith. But holding it so the price doesnt collapse to the advantage of akita holders, is directly disadvantaging open source projects for good we could be funding instead, which is my primary goal.


Right, so puffery, buzzword nonsense and meme filled hopium that is just going to hurt people entering the crypto space.

That sounds like all the more reason for the Gitcoin team to dump the coin.

Maybe you’ll work something out with them, but I personally have no patience for a project that peddles an unrealistic narrative on users who don’t know any better.

You can be a memecoin, but if you are a meme coin without any tech (or even the tech knowledge to make a realistic pitch) then be honest about it as people deserve to know what they are buying. When there is a disconnect between what they are being sold and what they get, that doesn’t do you any favors.


I think that its really irresponsible for you to talk in this context about our project which it is obvious you have no knowledge of. The community will decide what actions to take, hopefully they aren’t as narrow minded.

Don’t call our project a pyramid scheme. A lot of people are working very hard to bring utility.

Don’t call me dishonest because the initial roots of the project have become something more.

If you find a wallet on the side of the road, you look and see if any money is in there sure, and then you make a decision.

Edit: you also talk about us wanting to have the ability to dump, while in the next sentence proposing how to dump (on us) “the actual community”.


I would say definitely give it back to Akita , but there should be something in return Akita can do for Gitcoin which should be discussed and decided.


Fascinating thread that has emerged here, I personally don’t think any rash actions should be taken. Gitcoin is here to fund public goods, we will continue to do that with or without extravagant donations of dog based coins.

“Dumping on a community” is not something I think Gitcoin will or should ever do. An eye for an eye makes a world full of blind doges :service_dog:

I think the whole thing is kind of funny, honestly we should not be treating this as a real donation. We should ask the community AKITA and Gitcoin what they would like to see done with these funds to better Gitcoin ( besides just cash it out) I have seem projects come back from the ashes before and I would not put it past anyone to recreate themselves in a useful way if they so chose.

Full disclosure I have no clue what AKITA is all about, but I’m gonna look into it.

I would suggest that we don’t take this too seriously though, and please be civil to one another. This is not the place to bring arguments and vitriol :v:t3:


SELL HALF,KEEP HALF;because you will need the funds to build and selling to eth for investing and respect Vitalik; but keeping half could let the market stable,that’s my opinion

1 Like

Def don’t agree with this AKITA sent it to VB and VB sent it to Gitcoin so we will decide what to do with it together.


One way to think about this:

If the Akita community believed there was some surplus value in having Vitalik burn the tokens, then perhaps there is (additional?) surplus value in having Vitalik → Gitcoin do the burn. If that narrative would help Akita then perhaps they would be willing to offer Gitcoin some funds for burning the tokens.


Why not simply send the tokens back to the project and let them and their community sink or swim on their own. I see nothing but downside to GitCoin getting involved in this any deeper than they already are.

Another possibility is to send the tokens back to Vitalik with the implied message being “Thanks but no thanks.”

Charities give back tainted money all the time, and this feels like tainted money to me.


At the end of the day, if you send someone tokens, they can decide what to do with it after that.

If they send it then to someone else, there is no social contract nor obligation on that third-party listening to what the first party wants done with the tokens.

Akita is a meme coin and already plummeting.

This isn’t about if you fleece the community or not.

The fleece already took place when they bought the token.

This is like a game of musical chairs, the music has already stopped. The only question is who is sitting in the chair when it is all over. Will it be Gitcoin or will it be market makers and bots who eat Akita buyers alive?

Because a quick glance at the transactions for the Akita pool on Uniswap show that’s already what is happening. The retail investors are getting destroyed because they were sold on a pipe dream meme token - and that sucks. But Gitcoin not selling doesn’t change that.

The only scenario I see where Akita users get anything out of it is if after the selling the Ethereum is put to work and gains yield that gives them some pay back to a threshold.

Other than that, you can’t save a sinking ship, it doesn’t mean you need to go down with it though.


I’m not against this idea, it seems the most logical and rational way to deal with this extraordinary situation.

I don’t think it would serve Gitcoin to “cash out” on the misfortune of anyone, whether this project is a success of failure should really rest on their own shoulders. Taking an action one way or the other is kind of a signal we don’t want to make…


A sinking ship that has steadily rose since inception… I’m sorry man but your logic is way off. I just feel like you are looking at this in the context that we are just a meme coin. I’m not sure what project you work on or are invested in but I’m sure as hell you wouldn’t want it written off by someone who didn’t understand it. I’m also sure that had you been in AKITA a month ago you wouldn’t feel that way.


Hey relic, do you think there is a chance of an offer from Akita to Gitcoin in exchange for burning all of the tokens?

Potentially win-win. RE: post upthread “If the Akita community believed there was some surplus value in having Vitalik burn the tokens, then perhaps there is (additional?) surplus value in having Vitalik → Gitcoin burn the token. If that narrative would help Akita then perhaps they would be willing to offer Gitcoin some funds for burning the tokens.”


Got some information from the AKITA Telegram:

" We are building a dex on Avalanche that will bridge to eth and btc, we will use this dex to fund other defi projects on avax, we also have a meme swapping, farming and staking platform launching in a few weeks. Our main project will be AKITA network which will be a decentralized social media platform. This platform would use AKITA as a utility token and be governed by our community governance token."

I think these are interesting experiments, at the least.


Come on Yalor, these are buzz words.

Earlier in this thread they talked about how they are going to Miami to convince BTC maxis to use their AVAX dex.

One moment they are talking about a dex, then they are talking about meme swapping (wtf is that?) farming and staking launching “in a few weeks” (which would mean they should already have EVM compatible smart contracts they can show)

Then in the next sentence they talk about a network that is a decentralized social media platform.

None of that is on a website, none of that has any indication there is any technical team with the capabilities to build those things, nor that those things really mean anything to begin with anyway.

It’s like every 2017 buzzword project constantly pivoting to the next trope to keep up steam.

If they’ve got unique EVM compatible contracts I am happy to review them and then eat my hat. But, I’d put a healthy bet on the fact they don’t.


Our smart contract for our dex is forked from pangolin with a custom bridge being built, were working with the avax team and chainsafe to get this done right. The AKITA governance token is based on makers model and our meme swap is forked from sushi for the LP but the rest is custom. OK, so were not the uniswap core team but come on, were out here trying to build!

Look, I get it, be skeptical. I would be too, but everyone who didn’t get a few rounds of investments had to start somewhere small.


Yes, definitely willing to work with you guys on a good solution.


I like planckmatt’s idea of seeing what Akita can offer in exchange for burn so it’s a win-win for both and sounds like Akita is willing to work together for something positive out of all of this.


Do you have a link to the repos?

Because so far it sounds like you have plans to fork somethings that you don’t fully understand.


when my devs wake up ill make sure our repos are made public just for you sir