[Proposal] Second Claim Window for $GTC

[panda-hk]

Objection, since Gitcoin has been given a month for users to claim it, why not claim it

[Imuetinyan]

The objections to a second claim window sound reasonable when viewed in the light in light of the inherent vulnerability to bad actors. Sad the good intentions will be hurt by this also

[Jaytberry77]

I’m not a bot lol but I have been hospitalized for several weeks along with my wife do to a car accident. The car crash coincided with the market crash and I’m just now starting to evaluate my losses and this is a coin that I’ve been very impressed with an anxious to get on board with. I’ve been acquiring gitcoin via Coinbase but really would appreciate the opportunity to participate in claiming if available.

[sohvon]

Give them time i say! gitcoin could have been used for other reasons beforehand and then maybe they got a cold i donno

[touhonoob]

Objection.
People who didn’t pay attention to those 3 reminder emails were unlikely to be here for long-term in the first place.

[MhizC]

Imo, I think one month was enough for the window claim to be opened and with several remainders via mail…tsk… What makes us sure if given another grace of claim they would still claim it? Maybe they are either bots or long dead… Not trying to sound like a jerk here but let’s be realistic. ‘What if the remaining GTC addresses left to claim the drops are either bots or dead bodies account?’

What if!.

[owocki]

Our engineer Zac Wolff who worked on the ESMS is gonna drop a blog post with details of this system early next week I’m told.

As promised! Architecting & BUIDLing the GTC Token Distributor | Gitcoin Blog

[Cryptosense]

that would be fair and nice…giving the fact that some persons may have not gotten the info during these past month…

[avidandsouza]

We are in a State of Medical Emergency/Pandemic.

I was personally ,Down with Covid-19.
I’m from India ,the State is very bad here.

I think Gitcoin should consider ,this from a perspective of Users not claiming due to the state of the Earth in terms of Covid-19 and give the Gitcoin Donates another chance.

[avidandsouza]

I’m happy you were able to claim.

I am from India and I was infected with Covid-19 and recovered, as much as I love Gitcoin .
We should do a second Round to everyone who are facing similar Problems like me.

[avidandsouza]

Yes We Should Allow Users ,a Second Claim.

Why?
As much as users Love Gitcoin,they or their families could have been Affected with Covid-19.
Its a Pandemic,which hasn’t yet Ended in many countries.

I am personally from India,and I was down with Covid-19. We are still in Lockdown.
Numerous Lives Lost.

I’m sure there are more people like Me,who were Affected by Covid-19 who couldn’t claim the Airdrop. They Love Crypto Too,They love Gitcoin too.

That being said ,there are people who have made Contributions previously,
but have added the contributions after the Claim Round 1 , through https ://gitcoin.co /grants/ add-missing-contributions
I think they should be eligible too,for the Airdrop,as they have made Contributions just like everyone else.

Hoping the Community Votes for This with Heart!

[bigthomsan516888]

no more chance for the sybils, some people have multiple accounts

[coopahtroopa]

Weighing in here - I personally do not think we need a second claim window.

Gitcoin has actively messaged around the claim window multiple times. If you were inactive for 30 days while GTC was the talk of the town, I would argue you are not actively engaged in the community.

If there are any recipients who missed the claim window but are still active, I would vote that we slot them into as Stewards and reward them through Seasons - rather than relaunching the whole claims system for those who are not even aware of it existing.

I very much resonate with making sure that everyone who created value for Gitcoin is able to earn in, but would suggest we focus attention on rewarding those who are engaged moving forward rather than those who may not be around any longer.

@Yalor

Why ponder about what was done in the past, let’s focus on what we can do moving forward

[avidandsouza]

One month is very short a time frame at this time especially.

[krrisis]

+1 on this one. On top of this the multiple emails were an extra reminder that you simply could not miss.

[Yalor]

Summarizing some of the points that people have made in this thread,

@makoto

I think it’s either no limit or no second claim. There is no guarantee for the majority of the remaining to be claimed during the second claim (whether another 30 days or 1 year) so “why not third” will come up again.

I agree that there should be no “time-limit” on this claim window, so it needs to be different than the previous airdrop. I might suggest a flat amount per user that each person can claim for activity with an Etherscan txn proving they contributed to a grant before the airdrop cut-off time. Just one possible solution

@matthewcarano

“if” a secondary claim period is warranted to please also consider “how" it might be administered from a technical, comms, and support perspective. As well as “who” might administer it.

This is another great point from someone who understands the communication efforts that go into doing an airdrop, trying to ensure everyone knows about it is essentially impossible, but ensuring someone is heading up the communication efforts is something we must lock in before moving forward

@JTraversa

I think there should be a deadline to claim tokens. But it should likely be a significant period.

I think we need to discuss alternative structure that rewards people for diving in moving forward, not necessarily focus so much on lost contributions for people in the past, more thinking required here

@lefterisjp

As long as we have a list of ethereum addresses and claiming amount per address I don’t see why we can’t do a “normal style” contract airdrop where each user could claim their amount from the contract.

After speaking with the $GTC launch team there are a variety of potential claim errors that would each require deeper investigation, something that no-one, myself included, is in a position to do. It’s either a one size fits all solution or nothing at all. We can speak on these claim issues at length in a call if you like

I’ll outline the claim issues here briefly though:

• Group 1: People on the distribution list but could not claim.

• Group 2: People are not on the airdrop distribution list but did contribute to a grant/ participated in a hackathon/ or participated in Kernel before the cutoff date.

• Group 3: People who missed the eligibility cutoff date. Didn’t claim within the 30 day window cutoff.

So the discussion needs to be around 2 things, how can we incentivize these people to keep contributing and how can we verify that they were in-fact eligible for the airdrop in the first place.

It will require some support and documentation from the Gitcoin Team, who is already stretched thin and some support from the existing token holders to support such a distribution from the treasury.

So far I have not seen strong support for the second claim window to even proceed, but we have 3 more days until this goes to snapshot so let’s see

[giveinterest]

Burning unclaimed tokens has 2nd-most comment likes in the other thread.

Some see a burn as the least biased method to distribute the unclaimed value, with near zero operational or support costs.

A store grows by keeping unsold inventory.
A tree grows by letting some leaves fall.

[Yalor]

@giveinterest

A store grows by keeping unsold inventory.

Not sure how a store grows by keeping unsold inventory I’m pretty sure stores grow by selling things, but hey I’m no shopkeeper…

[tra38]

I am very sympathetic to the idea of opening a second (indefinite) claim window, but we have to make sure any approach we take should not incentivize any “sybil attacks” in the process. Something like this idea…

@Yalor

I might suggest a flat amount per user that each person can claim for activity with an Etherscan txn proving they contributed to a grant before the airdrop cut-off time. Just one possible solution

…might work, because you could set the flat amount to be so low that it doesn’t make sense to do a “sybil attack”, meaning only those who actually deserve the $GTC will be able to get it.

[alashooinc]

The problem here is simple.
The hodlers won’t vote yes on snapshot proposal.
It brings selling pressure.
And the holders won’t let it happen.