90 days doesn’t sound like the most reasonable amount of time, but sometimes that can be enough with very good communication. But you can look at the numbers in this post: Extension of the Airdrop Claim Period for Eligible Participants - #21 by cp287
it’s hard to call it super good communication about the 90 day deadline and what happens after that deadline.
90 days is enough to claim tokens and to at least once visit Twitter and read the latest publications if a person is interested in the project.
As already lined out in a previous response to this topic in another thread I’m hesitant to support this motion in the current state. My opinion in short:
It’s also very important to consider how long the project has been going on, as this directly affects what can happen to people who were once involved in the project.
The longer the development period of the project, the longer the claim period should be, as the number of people involved in the project who have already changed their focus to other things, but still deserve to be rewarded for their contribution during the development of the project, is much higher.
And despite the fact that, in my opinion the much bigger problem is not the deadline, but the communication in that deadline, which is imho hard to call sufficient, 90 days for a project that has been actively developing for more than three years still seems like a fairly short time frame.
In this post, I used the numbers from the twitter api and it looks like it counted the total number of obol tweets for the month from March 24 to April 24. Apparently the number ~600 contains the total number of reposts and replies. So the numbers in my previous post are not really relevant to our situation.
I just counted the number of tweets separately in the feed for the same period, which was 160 tweets per month, which gives us an average of about 500 tweets for the 3 months period. And 4 posts still accounts for less than 1% of all posts in the feed.
And that’s a very small value even for people who follow twitter very closely and still seems like not enough communication when people might not get the reward they deserve for their efforts and lose it forever.
Did I understand you correctly — you believe it’s fairer to reward those who managed to claim earlier twice, while giving nothing to those who were just a bit late — even though they may have contributed just as much to Obol?
If that’s the case, then why did the previous proposal — which followed that exact logic — receive only 16.36% support?
It seems to me that the community has already expressed its opinion on that approach.
Now it’s time to listen to what they think about this proposal
I believe these tokens could be put to better use by rewarding loyal users. At the moment, I don’t have any specific ideas.
I’ve outlined a few points to help avoid this kind of issue in the future (including based on feedback): more communication:
(Unfortunately, the settings of this forum don’t allow me to edit my original post.* *So after collecting feedback, I’ll publish a new version of the proposal that reflects the suggested improvements)
I agree that any work and expenses by the Obol team related to this proposal should be compensated.
This point will be added.
In reality, only 8,643 addresses claimed their tokens by the end of the airdrop period — that’s around 40% of all eligible participants (out of 21,634).
It’s hard to say exactly how many tokens went unclaimed, but it’s clear that more than half of the participants didn’t receive their allocation
I believe that such a large number of participants deserve a chance to claim their airdrop and are definitely worth the operational costs involved in making this happen
I’ve noticed that many respected delegates haven’t shared their views on this topic yet — even though, as I mentioned earlier, it affects around 60% of Obol’s potential holders.
Please consider expressing your opinion, even if it differs from mine or anyone else’s
@Ignas @Jose_StableLab @Curia @DAOplomats @Areta @FranklinDAO @Stakesaurus @Tane
@zwanzger.eth and many others…
Thanks for the ping and making your case thoroughly!
Tbh, when this first came up I thought it’ll die quickly and personally also did not see the need.
But you brought forward good data, incorporated feedback, good work.
I still believe, implementing this will not add a lot of value tbh (meaning new engaged community members).
If we were to do it, I am 100% with @stefa2k ideas/requests.
Also the technical feasibility and any potential legal or regulatory concerns should be checked by the association.
While not sure yet how I’d vote, I could see putting this up for vote could be a valid way forward.
Thank you cp0x for putting up this proposal in a better format for governance evaluation.
We think that the claim period and communications from the OBOL team were sufficient to allow all community members to check and claim their rewards. It is really uncommon web3 project extend claiming periods. Further airdrop data (% of OBOL claimed, % of eligible wallets claimed) in comparison with major airdrops could better signal toward a clear lack of communication from the Obol team against the usual long-tail userbase that unfortunately, for one reason or another, couldn’t make it on time to claim within the set period.
To execute, this proposal would need bandwith from the OBOL team, and we think there are currently better purposes for this dev time than re-enabling the airdrop. In addition, there are multiple ways for the OBOL community to continue earning Obol tokens, via ETH staking, OBOL staking or even becoming an active delegate. For this reason, even if the airdrop window was missed, the community still has multiple ways to earn rewards by acting in alignment with Obol.
For all the above, we don’t see a strong enough case with the current version of this proposal to request the Obol team to extend the claiming period.
Thank you for your detailed answer.
Despite your position, do you think it is fair to hold a vote on this issue?
I think this is a no brainer proposal.
We need to prioritize community even if short term token might go down in price due to higher airdrop claim and sell.
But I would even extend an airdrop claim period for a year if our resources allow.
Proposal Title: Extension of the Airdrop Claim Period for Eligible Participants
Status: [Final]
Proposal Type: Airdrop
Abstract:
This proposal requests an extension of the claim period for the recent Obol airdrop, allowing eligible participants who were unable to claim within the initial timeframe to receive their tokens.
The extension is aimed at fostering inclusivity, enhancing community trust, and ensuring long-term engagement within the Obol ecosystem
Motivation:
The airdrop is an important mechanism for distributing ownership, aligning incentives, and growing the Obol community. However, a significant number ( more than half of the participants didn’t receive their allocation ~60% ) of eligible participants were unable to claim their tokens due to a variety of reasons, such as:
Ultimately, the specific reasons listed above are not the most important factor. What truly matters is that these users actively contributed to the growth and decentralization of the Obol network but were unable to claim. The claim restrictions seem to have been introduced primarily as a procedural measure, rather than being necessitated by security, legal, or regulatory considerations.
Other major Web3 projects have recognized the importance of honoring contributor efforts over rigid deadlines. For example, Optimism introduced multiple rounds of retroactive airdrops to include previously excluded contributors
and Arbitrum provided 6-month claim period.
These examples show that flexibility and fairness are aligned with decentralization principles
Extending the claim period offers several benefits:
Specification:
Communications Plan
To address the concern regarding insufficient or missed communications, this proposal also includes a clear and actionable communications plan to ensure maximum awareness in the event of a claim period extension:
By incorporating this communication strategy, the proposal aims to significantly mitigate the risk of users missing out again, ensuring that the extended claim period achieves its full intended impact
Technical Problem
Currently, it is no longer possible to execute claimAndDelegate due to the campaign’s expiration.
However, the contract allows the creation of a new campaign via createUnlockedCampaign or createLockedCampaign.
Accordingly, action is indeed required from the Obol developers — to launch a new campaign — but no contract modification is necessary
Expenses
Expenses by the Obol team related to this proposal should be compensated both the costs of developers and active promotion in the media
** Action Plan:**
Conclusion:
This proposal requests an additional 8 weeks for eligible participants to claim their tokens.
By extending the airdrop claim period, Obol can align with these best practices, reinforce its commitment to fairness, and foster a stronger and more active community
p.s. We have confirmation from 4 delegates from the top 100 who agree to launch this vote
There isn’t a single confirmation of the proposal from a delegate in accordance with the rules