Good deal 
I’m totally agry with you
Although I like the reproducibility of the single posts structure and especially the discussion around the topic, it would be nice to have an aggregate view structured as polls.
Example
0. Distribute how many unsold tokens to the LBP contributors?
- 0%
- 5%
- 15%
- 30%
- 50%
0
voters
1. Should we distribute tokens to the LBP contributors who have already sold their tokens?
- yes
- no
0
voters
2. How many tokens should we distribute to one LBP contributor?
- Depends on how many RAD he/she exchanged
- Depends on how many USDC he/she exchanged
0
voters
Should we set a limit for distributing RAD to one LBP contributor?
- yes → upper limit
- no
0
voters
@dhejrdlf1 wdyt? Feel free to adjust the options.
5 Likes
I participated on the LBP and I am against this proposal as it stands. Reasons below:
1. “LBP was expensive”.
It wasn’t. Pretty much everyone is in profit right now! If you participated you probably believe that this project can be a multi-billion dollar project, so this arguments makes no sense.
But most importantly, how can you believe in the free market and reason like that? No-one forced anyone to buy. Every person that participated had their own expectations and pricing methods. If someone bought, they bought for their own reasons (e.g. invest, support the project, speculate) and the project is doing great in all of them.
2. “But the early investors got a better price”
From what I understand some of them invested as early as in 2018… That’s three years ago, when probably noone gave an f about Radicle, especially during the bear market. Sure you probably didn’t know about it, but a project of this caliber can only raise funds from accredited investors to avoid legal troubles. So the team didn’t probably have any other option.
Some of their investors are some of the biggest names in the world, so they add value as well. And including their lock-ups it’s about 4 years of waiting in total.
3. “But we could give more voting power to LBP participants”
In my opinion tokens should be “earned”. You buy them in the market or you do work for the community and earn them. None of that happened here. If you want more voting power, the market is open. Buy tokens.
4. Free money means price dump
Distributing tokens to LBP participants means that some of them will sell and that will negatively impact the price, which is in great trajectory right now. You need to have a really great reason to want that. The same thing in pretty much every other airdrop.
5. This proposal doesn’t benefit all token holders.
In my opinion it will probably not pass. It’s better to think of crafting proposals that benefit the project as a whole and not only your personal interests.
7 Likes
Too much talks beneficial to oneself. @burial is probably an early investor who doesn’t want to give voting power to other parts of the community. If this proposal fails, this obviously reflects how the small number of the community members controls the project and it means this project will just be another Github. Centralization doesn’t help in this field. If the current state doesn’t change or if the core team thinks it’s okay with that, I will be out.
8 Likes
Following your argument: if you optimize for decentralization, then why distribute to LBP participants?
for instance why not distribute tokens to new Radicle users or seed node operators? or existing open-source developers? more holders = more decentralization no?
I still don’t understand how LBP participants have earned any right to more tokens.
1 Like
A lot of us bought after the LBP event and intend to support this project and network. Not sure why we are being left out of this proposal with the sole reason being we didn’t buy within the short window of the LBP. My two cents is that these unsold tokens should remain in the treasury and be used to support people that seed the network and use Radicle as their main repository.
This 
- need to think long term and where these funds are best used
@burial @imrane Rewarding people who support as seeders (I am one of them actually) is necessary off course but at the same time, there must be a mechanism to support it. It’s not one time thing. Plus it is out of the scope for this discussion page ( you guys should create one and let’s discuss there!). Good opinions are welcomed here but you guys should understand most of us visiting here “support” for this proposal (see opinions above). What majority thinks should be reflected in votes. Otherwise, it is called centralization. I love the mission of this project that’s why I’m currently supporting from all sides but if it remains as as a centralized project, I will probably go and find other projects that’s more DAO (not just “saying” to become but true one).
4 Likes
I agree. It sux because I sold 2 days after the bootstrapping event thinking the whole crypto market was going to crash. I’m only a newby to crypto and want to see Radicle prosper so I bought back in the next day after the market bounced back. If there was a way I could be rewarded too e.g. locking in from my second buy the day after the balancer event that would be rad, if not I’m ok with it because it’s a community decision.
@dhejrdlf1 @onur what do you guys think about this idea mentioned before? If possible, I’d like to ask it to the community. This will potentially increase the chance to win much more votes from new LBP holders. [Structured Discussion] Distribute LBP unsold tokens to the people who contributed to the LBP in proportion to their contribution - #39 by all_in_radicle
So far I’m not supportive of this proposal in general. I’m open to change my mind and for now just help to facilitate the conversation. Regarding your idea specifically I think adding another layer of complexity won’t help. I would keep the proposal as simple as possible.
I do see LBP-participants (the original 48h) as an important peer group. In the history of Radicle I would love to see this event to be acknowledged. I’m especially excited for the group that is still contributing in months or potentially years from now.
2 Likes
Got it, fair enough. Let’s keep things simple then! I’ve been spending too much time here recently… Time to go back to dev
1 Like
@abbey What’s the next step?
3 Likes
In its current form, this seems like a grab by those that have purchased in a 2 days window for no reason other than the fact they think they overpaid in an open auction. I will be voting against this and will encourage others in my circle to do the same.
Yes I agree with you on this one. That’s why I’m suggesting to include all LBP participants who hold RADs currently. We should seriously think about this option attached to pass it. [Structured Discussion] Distribute LBP unsold tokens to the people who contributed to the LBP in proportion to their contribution - #39 by all_in_radicle
2 Likes
This is great, thanks @clearloop! My answers are:
0. Distribute how many unsold tokens to the LBP contributors?
- [ ] 5%
- [ ] 15%
- [ ] 30%
- [✓ ] 50%
1. Should we distribute tokens to the LBP contributors who have already sold their tokens?
- [ ] yes
- [✓ ] no
2. How many tokens should we distribute to one LBP contributor?
- [✓ ] Depends on how many RAD he/she exchanged
- [ ] Depends on how many USDC he/she exchanged
3. Should we set a limit for distributing RAD to one LBP contributor?
- [ ] yes → upper
- [✓ ] no
1 Like
Try voting on this bro, [Structured Discussion] Distribute LBP unsold tokens to the people who contributed to the LBP in proportion to their contribution - #42 by onur, it’s better than the post I drafted above
1 Like
Ref to the reply of @cloudhead :
since the LBP has 1.8M and we are moving only about 300K of those to uniswap
After we moving 300k of the LBP tokens to uniswap, there are around 1.5M left.
Just check the result of our votes in this thread, most of the voters support distributing 50% of the unsold RADs in the LBP to the LBP holders, it’s around 750k RADs now.
We only have 1058 LBP addresses who hold their 900k RADs from the LBP till now, to be honest, I personally think we might want too much since RAD is for the community but not the LBP holders only, but I’m not going to share my opinions on how to use the left RADs on other things because we are talking about distributing them to the LBP holders now.
It would be nice if there is a feature in snapshot that can decide how much percent of the unsold distributing to the LBP holders by the voting RADs.
For example, here are two voters Alice and Bob, Alice votes 50% using 100 RADs amd Bob votes 0% using 100 RADs, the result is 25%, this would be really awesome, hahaha
But if we really are asking for 50% of the unsold in the next few days, we can discuss the lock limit now, maybe with liner release?
0. Lock time of the Distributing RADs?
- 12 months
- 6 months
- 3 months
- 1 month
0
voters
1. How often to unlock the Distributing RADs?
- 50% of the lock time
- 25% of the lock time
- 20% of the lock time
- 10% of the lock time
0
voters
2. The type of the line in the liner release(I’m not sure how to call it…)
- unlock from high to low
- unlock fixed proportion the whole time
- unlock from low to high
0
voters
4 Likes
100% agree with this.
It would be more beneficial in the long-run to incentivize people providing technical support for the project.
Giving away to LBP supporters does absolutely nothing to grow the product OR the community.
I would vote “No” on this proposal.
3 Likes
Hey all 
Great to see the coordination behind this proposal! It’s awesome to see the engagement and kudos to @clearloop @all_in_radicle @dhejrdlf1 for championing it. Wanted to hop in and provide some thoughts before this moves to Formal Review.
To start:
I feel that the main message behind this proposal is that the community wants to see a wider distribution of voting power. I completely agree I actually believe it’s necessary for the network to be further decentralized among its community to ensure resilience & long-term sustainability. I don’t, however, agree that the most productive way for the project to distribute more governing power is via an airdrop to LBP participants.
My reasoning:
-
What is the benefit of distributing more RAD to LBP holders vs. other parties? As @burial @onur @jebba @bordumb @imrane and others pointed out — why should governing power be distributed to LBP participants vs. everyone else? LBP participants are definitely a MUCH appreciated segment of the Radicle community as some of the first token holders, but there are many other segments who are currently contributing to the network in other ways. This includes seed node operators, those contributing via the Seeders program, those contributing to Radicle docs and codebases, earliest adopters (in terms of users!), and community members participating in moderation, governance, and development discussions.
I personally want to see governing power distributed to:
- Active governance participants (those who vote and participate in discussions/Snapshots - like those in this thread!)
- Seed node operators (those who improve the reliability and availability of the network)
- Contributors (technical and non-technical)
- Users
I’d argue that investing time into the development of long-term community incentivization programs to reward these parties would benefit the project more than a one-off airdrop to only LBP participants. Additionally, I think it’s important to note that these programs would probably end up rewarding LBP participants as well! It’s clear there’s a strong community of individuals who joined during the LBP that are interested in supporting the project in the long-term. I think these holders should be rewarded, I just don’t think that the airdrop outlined in this proposal is the most strategic, high-impact, or risk-adverse way to do that.
-
How would we ensure that an airdrop to LBP participants wouldn’t “harm” the network more than “help”? Distributing tokens introduces more actors to the system. Since there is no way to determine the “intent” of LBP participants besides if they are still holding (relatively a short term feat, since we are only a couple weeks out from launch), it’s hard to quantify how much this proposal would “help” or “harm” the network. We can all agree that short-term sell-offs instead of long-term holding will negatively impact the price of RAD. This seems like a potential negative side effect that impacts the whole project while only a benefiting a selection of token holders.
-
How would this be implemented in practice? I see a couple issues with implementation because the the details of the distribution are a bit unclear. Many of my initial questions are already being discussed in the thread, but there’s two that remain unanswered:
-
How do we know that all of LBP participants in this airdrop will support the project in the long-term? As mentioned in my previous point, it’s hard to understand the positive vs. negative effects this would have on the project in the long-term.
-
Why reward holders who only interacted with the LBP pool? Let’s remember that the LBP event was only 48hrs long. Trading was only un-paused to provide more liquidity. Therefore, anybody who participated in the LBP after the 48hrs (when the pool’s weights were at 50:50) is technically no different from someone who bought RAD via Uniswap or another decentralized exchange. Why should they be rewarded over those who participated, for example, in the Uniswap pool?
I think this proposal will have a hard time passing because it fails to show why this will benefit all token holders and the project in the long-term.
-
To wrap up, I disagree with the sentiment that “if people don’t support this proposal it means that the project is centralized”. The journey from centralization → decentralization doesn’t happen in a day. Progressive decentralization is a necessary factor to ensure the long-term success and sustainability and it’s the responsibility of current RAD holders to ensure that governing power of the network is being distributed among those who will best support the long-term sustainability & resilience of the network. I don’t see enough proof in this proposal that a one-time airdrop to LBP holders would benefit the growth, success, or sustainability of the network over longer-term incentivization plans that reward community members (including LBP holders!!) for their time, work, contributions, or “loyalty” to the project (I’m thinking we could definitely re-purpose your script to quantify this @clearloop…).
Despite these concerns, there is nothing stopping this proposal from being submitted for Formal Review! Following the guidelines in Governance Guidelines, the proposal’s champions (@all_in_radicle @dhejrdlf1 @clearloop maybe?) can take the feedback from this discussion, iterate on the proposal, create a Snapshot poll (5 days), and create a new thread on Discourse. I’d suggest that in this next iteration, some time is taken to clearly describe what is being proposed (how many tokens, to what/how many people, with what vesting etc…) and reflect on why distributing to LBP holders vs. other parties will benefit all RAD holders and the Radicle project in the long-term.
Happy to support where I can! 
11 Likes