Pre-proposal call for discussion: What should we do with dropped tokens

[Sirlupinwatson]

Hi @tjayrush,

Would you mind to establish a quick recap of what is the problem here before going into a full proposal. I am a bit confuse even after reading all the post regarding the Akita token incident.

Who did drop these tokens?, Why?, Why we should redistribute them? What was the purpose of this drop? At who this drop was indented to be?
Who did started this project and why it landed here at Gitcoin? What is the relation about this project and Gitcoin?

Citing this post here:

[Proposal - Akita] Proposal to Gitcoin community from AKITA

This is the AKITA communities proposal to the recent decision by Vitalik Buterin to send half of their supply to Gitcoin. 1. Summary - Our proposal is to burn everything that VB sent except for 5%. Leave 5% to stimulate progress between both communities. The reason for 5% is because, prior to the original developer leaving the project they burned 5% of the supply. This gives the token supply a 5% window that can be extracted before starting to mess with the original token metrics of the projec…

I quote in this proposal:

“The motivation behind this proposal is to mitigate collateral damage. The Akita investors invested believing that half of our supply was “burned” to VBs wallet.”

The motivation behind this proposal is not really clear. Why should Gitcoin interfere with the valuation of this project by redistributing these tokens or by allowing ressources consumption from burning them. It’s clear that many user want a redistribution, but at what cost, what are the main impacts, pros and cons etc.