[Proposal - Akita] Allow a Vote on the GitCoin proposals for donated AKITA tokens Including both GTC and AKITA holders via Snapshot

The AKITA community again asks for representation in this voting process. Based on this post RFC: Transfer $SACKS LP position to Gitcoin Governance Timelock by @owocki , it is a fact that alternate voting means on the GitCoin platform is possible via Snapshot.

We ask that the vote on the proposals of what to do with Akita tokens that were donated by @vbuterin include all AKITA holders via Snapshot and do not view this as an unreasonable proposal.


If you want representation, sell some of your $AKITA for $GTC and vote like the rest of us.

Asking to bring your representation from out side the ecosystem to affect ours without having a stake for yourself is a ‘no op’.



I do understand your standpoint, but I think the members of the Akita community have a stake in this even if they don’t have GTC.

I bought GTC just so I can participate, but this shouldn’t have been necessary. The reason for this is because the growth of Akita has a direct impact on the current and future value of VB:s donation to Gitcoin.

The Akita team and its community is the driving force behind increasing the value of the Akita token and the value of this donation.

Since Akita plays such a major role in increasing the value of the donation, I think it makes sense to make it easier for that community to vote.


As someone who believes that akita has 0 value and that all assets should be liquidated post haste, I can’t in good conscious accept the notion that AKITA should have a say in how GTC conducts itself on this matter.

If holders of AKITA want a voice, buy one.


Very much appreciate your opinion here @androolloyd. This would be a solid compromise under your own logic. Most in the AKITA community don’t really want a lasting voice at GitCoin, but when a vote directly involves that community, of course they will seek to participate. Allowing for a vote via Snapshot for this particular topic would satisfy most, if not all parties, including yourself


Not wanting a lasting voice is the problem, that is non contributory behaviour, and seeks to rent extract from the Gitcoin community.

If the AKITA community wants to participate in our governance, they are welcome and will always be welcome to, but there is no free rider vote here.

1 Like

We disagree on a few points for sure. If AKITA is worth 0 as you say, then why such a strong opinion on what’s done with them? Our AKITA community has a strong opinion as well. We would only vote in a way that maximized the value of our community’s future interest, and thus the value for all parties, I’m sure of that. If it end up being worth more than 0, then that would be a solid outcome for you. We don’t need to be best buddies, but we can vote alongside each other on this to maximize the outcome.


The reason it matters is because the market values it way more than I do and that is opportunity best utilized by the best interests of the broader Gitcoin Community.

How I value the coins means nothing, the market has associated a significant value on them and I and many others believe that that value should be put to work in a better means than to be stuck in Dog Meme coins. (I honestly have a hard time with the fact I have to write this in an online forum to get the point across, around how ridiculous dog meme coins are)

The coins being liquidated to an asset with greater economic utility is the only rational play to be made here, furthermore, having outside parties be allowed to directly vote destroys the value proposition of liquid democracy.

If the AKITA community want a voice in what happens inside the Gitcoin community they are free to acquire one.

To expect one for nothing is foolish.

I do not believe that the Akita tokens have 0 value since the market says otherwise and certainly don’t believe that there is anything wrong with speculating on any asset, people have traded far worse things than harmless meme tokens.

While one solution is to sell all the tokens at market but that would 1. cause immense slippage. 2.
cause prices to dump and undue distress to the Akita community.

I think the fairest way to distribute those tokens is to airdrop the akita tokens to GTC holder addresses wrt the % of their GTC holdings.
This will not cause prices to fall sharply since many would hold on to the tokens and at the very least not everyone will sell at the same time.
Also if Akita holders believe in their project and their dev team continues to build features to their product this would be a great way to introduce new people to their project and many will buy more from market too if they see value in the project.


The tokens aren’t owned by the GTC Holders they are owned by the DAO, and the goal here isn’t to enrich ourselves but to enrich our community and to find sustainable ways to fund open source.

Allow akita to reach its worth!!

Burn all tokens given to GTC by VB, as originally intended by the AKITA project. As VB sets a role model and let GTC decide the fate of these tokens lets be fair and burn about 96% and divide 2% to GTC and 2% to AKITA project dev, and then let the market decide what happens to AKITA


We can gradually sell to fund projects in the community

1 Like

Sounds great mate, so does the participation include any terms?

1 Like

Allow it would be nice! imagine?all holdings will be of this tokens will be rewarded?!awesome


Con todo el respeto vallanse a la mierda con su token Akita CZ BINANCE crearon un casino , frenaron el progeso de la tecnologia y quieren poder donde todos donaban sin animo de lucro y ustedes vendian humo? porfavor