I will take an analogy to evaluate this, by thinking about the Akita instance.
Unless a token is notorious, it can be part of GTC community by default (i.e. legit custodian send token to community address, the gitcoin became the new custodian). Otherwise multisig wallet can vote and reject.
Analogy:
Token A joined Gitcoin with some hesitation (wallet owner made the choice, but not other hodler/speculators), therefore it is part of GTC community, it should have some degree of ‘freedom’ to find out whether prefer to stay or go.
(One possible way of giving that freedom back to A community:
Put 50% of A and pair with GTC to create a new liquidity pool (so price is set at the time) - or maybe 10% at a time so price discovery can be spread on 5 attempts, with say 6 month break in between so total 2 years, then this 50% is free to go.
The rest 50% A will be part of the GTC community and will not be sold. (Maybe use as grant/capital/even voting, it is a separate issue)
So we end up with a portfolio of token alliance. it is like a charitable extension or franchise part of wider gitcoin community.
Benefits:
The impact of gitcoin community is much wider by this type of token alliance.
If this didn’t work out (how do we define this?) - it is a phased approach so all can learn and change the direction.
)