Abstract
After the successful vote for AIP- 21 & 22 , this AIP proposes a mechanism to introduce differentiating utility for MAYC M 2 vs M 1 . This proposal is to increase the ApeCoin rewards by 50 % from 2 , 042 to 3 , 063 for MAYC M 2 .
Motivation
By increasing the ApeCoin Rewards for MAYC M 2 NFT, staking participations will be able to benefit from the differentiated utility and bringing more demand and awareness to the MAYC collection.
Rationale
It’s aesthetically and financially evident there is a big distinction between M 1 vs M 2 but there has not been any differentiation in the utility within the MAYC collection.
Specifications
This will be building on the foundation of the platform Horizen Labs built.
Increase the amount of ApeCoin can be staked for MAYC M 2 by 50 % of MAYC M 1 .
MAYC M 2 NFT: 3 , 063 ApeCoin
Steps to Implement
Request a quote and if approved, a Change Order will be drafted and submitted to Horizen Labs.
Timeline - Relevant timing details, including but not limited to start date, milestones, and completion dates.
TBC if this AIP is approved and formal timeline to be requested from Horizen Labs
Proposals submitted to the AIP Ideas category can be vague, incomplete ideas. Topics submitted here are not required to be submitted as a formal AIP Draft Template, however, you may still use the template if you wish.
This post discusses a proposal for AIP to introduce differentiated utility for MAYC M 2 NFT by increasing the ApeCoin rewards by 50%. The motivation behind this is to enhance staking participation and create more demand for the MAYC collection. The proposal aims to build on the platform Horizen Labs built, increasing the staking amount for MAYC M 2. The post outlines steps to implement the proposal and indicates that the timeline will be determined if the AIP is approved.
Welcome to the forums @BitcoinBaddie and thanks for posting your idea.
I’m not sure if rebalancing …
Welcome to the forums @BitcoinBaddie and thanks for posting your idea.
I’m not sure if rebalancing the existing pool is even doable and so, while others with deeper experience in DeFi and staking will have their own feedback, I imagine what you’re asking the DAO to consider and approve is a new pool of $APE to be granted and added to the existing staking pool of 175 m.
Would you mind laying out how this might benefit the DAO?
Thanks
SSP✌?
I’m not clear why there needs to be a distinction made within a unified collection like MAYC. M 2 …
I’m not clear why there needs to be a distinction made within a unified collection like MAYC. M 2 is essentially a trait, albeit a rarer one than the others, within the Mutant Ape Yacht Club collection. To reconfigure rewards based on this sort of criteria would open up a whole new can of worms: should DMT Bored Apes get their own pool? Or BAYC Flipped Brims?
The collections are represented as a whole, no preference extended to categorical nuances. I personally don’t see the need to essentially create an entire new pool based on subdivisions of these individual collections.
Also, as @ssp 1111 mentioned, it may not even be a logistical possibility in the first place, to say nothing of the impact it would have on other pools’ emissions even if it were to be implemented.
Emoney2zips: I concur. The “slippery slope” here is that if one segment gets special treatment, the ethical next step is that ALL segments should be considered for differentiation. Which would then likely lead to the conclusions of “rarer traits = higher rewards” which would then mean a complete reconfiguring of the entire staking rewards structure with a significantly higher chunk going towards BAYC, since they are inherently “more rare” due to collection size, which would end up with your m2 differentiation getting LESS than the amount you currently are getting. Further, this would be a massive time sink to change an already effective stratification of rewards. I am inferring you are an M2 holder from the wording of this, (specifically “aesthetically and finacially evident that there is a big distinction between M1 v M2”) but the lack of differentiation of artificial segments of an NFT collection is probably something that could be more effectively approached by addressing the NFT collection team itself, rather than an wholly separate and unrelated entity.
withoutname: I’m not clear why there needs to be a distinction made within a unified collection like MAYC. M2 is essentially a trait, albeit a rarer one than the others, within the Mutant Ape Yacht Club collection. To reconfigure rewards based on this sort of criteria would open up a whole new can of worms: should DMT Bored Apes get their own pool? Or BAYC Flipped Brims?
The collections are represented as a whole, no preference extended to categorical nuances. I personally don’t see the need to essentially create an entire new pool based on subdivisions of these individual collections.
First, mate, happy to see you active in the Apecoin DAO!
Originally I wanted to write my own reply, but I think that @CryptoLogically sums it up nicely.
The same thoughts about the proposal. It’s one collection like Kennels (with or without weapons) or BAYC with different rarity traits.
Plus actual floor price difference is around 1.4 ETH only - I dont see any reason to have a unique $ape allocation pool for this type of fur.
-withoutname
StoicDegen: Nailed it. One collection (M1, M2 and Mega)
I concur. The “slippery slope” here is that if one segment gets special treatment, the ethical next…
I concur. The “slippery slope” here is that if one segment gets special treatment, the ethical next step is that ALL segments should be considered for differentiation. Which would then likely lead to the conclusions of “rarer traits = higher rewards” which would then mean a complete reconfiguring of the entire staking rewards structure with a significantly higher chunk going towards BAYC, since they are inherently “more rare” due to collection size, which would end up with your m 2 differentiation getting LESS than the amount you currently are getting. Further, this would be a massive time sink to change an already effective stratification of rewards. I am inferring you are an M 2 holder from the wording of this, (specifically “aesthetically and finacially evident that there is a big distinction between M 1 v M 2 ”) but the lack of differentiation of artificial segments of an NFT collection is probably something that could be more effectively approached by addressing the NFT collection team itself, rather than an wholly separate and unrelated entity.
Hey BitcoinBaddie! I believe that MAYC is MAYC wether is M 2 or M 1 , otherwise what should be the…
Hey BitcoinBaddie! I believe that MAYC is MAYC wether is M 2 or M 1 , otherwise what should be the case for Mega Mutants? I wouldn’t add another pool or change the existing one personally.
Yea that makes sense and all the points people shared are valid.
mods, feel free to close this thr…
Yea that makes sense and all the points people shared are valid.
mods, feel free to close this thread.
Thanks for sharing your idea either way! You took action and opened a topic, glad to see that!
Thanks for sharing your idea either way! You took action and opened a topic, glad to see that!
I’m not clear why there needs to be a distinction made within a unified collection like MAYC. M 2 …
I’m not clear why there needs to be a distinction made within a unified collection like MAYC. M 2 is essentially a trait, albeit a rarer one than the others, within the Mutant Ape Yacht Club collection. To reconfigure rewards based on this sort of criteria would open up a whole new can of worms: should DMT Bored Apes get their own pool? Or BAYC Flipped Brims?
The collections are represented as a whole, no preference extended to categorical nuances. I personally don’t see the need to essentially create an entire new pool based on subdivisions of these individual collections.
First, mate, happy to see you active in the Apecoin DAO!
Originally I wanted to write my own reply, but I think that @CryptoLogically sums it up nicely.
The same thoughts about the proposal. It’s one collection like Kennels (with or without weapons) or BAYC with different rarity traits.
Plus actual floor price difference is around 1 . 4 ETH only - I dont see any reason to have a unique $ape allocation pool for this type of fur.
-withoutname
initiative is never bad, thank you for taking the time to suggest something, and thank you for list…
initiative is never bad, thank you for taking the time to suggest something, and thank you for listening to the members of the community.
Hello @BitcoinBaddie and community,
This AIP Idea is nearing the 7 day working limit to be moved …
Hello @BitcoinBaddie and community,
This AIP Idea is nearing the 7 day working limit to be moved forward as a Draft. Are you comfortable with the amount of discussion generated by this proposal? Or would you like to request another week period to keep the discussion fueled? Please let us know at your soonest convenience within the next 48 hours. If we do not hear back, we will assume you are content and will move this Idea forward to Draft Preparation.
Best,
-mallard
Take all my $APE.
(This is very selfishly motivated)
Probably should have distinguished membership …
Take all my $APE.
(This is very selfishly motivated)
Probably should have distinguished membership perks, but M 2 s did cost substantially more on the market + as serums, so there should be some added value to holding them. Wouldve been nice to get an extra 1000 $APE over M 1 s… something? it’s worth discussing for sure.
Thank you @BitcoinBaddie for your ideas and the ApeCoin DAO community for the thoughtful discussion…
Thank you @BitcoinBaddie for your ideas and the ApeCoin DAO community for the thoughtful discussions. A moderator will get in touch with the author to draft the AIP in the appropriate template. Once the AIP is drafted and meets all the DAO-approved guidelines, the proposal will be posted on Snapshot for live official voting at: Snapshot
Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments. @BitcoinBaddie please see your messages for the next steps.
Best,
-mallard
Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,
@BitcoinBaddie has requested to withdraw their application.
This AIP will…
Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,
@BitcoinBaddie has requested to withdraw their application.
This AIP will be moved to and remain in the Withdrawn AIPs category. Kind Regards,
-Amplify
