Idea: use PGF to airdrop NAM to donors to Coin Center šŸ”„

PGF Ops Idea šŸ’”
1

Edit: updated title and post Dec 11
decided that itā€™s not worth the risk of associating Namadaā€™s fledgling brand with TCā€™s established reputation. Coin Center donors are a better choice

This could be a fun and exciting way to drive support for Coin Center, AND a way for common people to get NAM before Phase 5.

Coin Center team has done and is doing key advocacy work that has influenced crypto policies, regulations, and laws in the USA.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling validated their argument, and now the US legal system has recognized that decentralized protocols and smart contracts are not owned by anyone, and thus a new type of infrastructure.

Idea: use on-chain PGF to airdrop NAM to those who donate to Coin Center within a 14 or 21 day window

How much? 1m in total to be split pro-rata by those who donate to Coin Center

How?
Specifics tbd, butā€¦

  1. Begin a 14-day campaign for people to donate to Coin Center, ideally with something like Juicebox (example)
  2. Donor puts their tnam in the message. Optional to attach one of the Namada images that an artist has made for this campaign
    image
    image1164Ɨ732 72.1 KB
  3. After 14 days, use automation to collect tnam addresses and donation amounts
  4. Make a donor list with NAM airdrop amount: ( ETH_donated_by_person / total_ETH_donated_in_14d ) * 1m NAM
  5. Create PGF proposal(s) using list of donor tnam addresses
    (could be cPGF, which would ā€œstreamā€ the tokens to the recipients over time)

Considerations: 1m NAM would be 2% of Namadaā€™s annual PGF budget, assuming 5% PGF inflation. weā€™d need stakers/validators to vote on it. we (Luminara) could champion this. wdyt?

ā€œThe court is saying that immutable smart contracts are not subject to sanctions since theyā€™re not owned by anyone. The US legal system is finally acknowledging that decentralized protocols are a new type of infrastructure in the world.ā€
https://x.com/0xCygaar/status/1861553438628421882

GdWWFU5XYAA-Q15
GdWWFU5XYAA-Q15564Ɨ119 6.67 KB

7 Likes
2

Hi Gavin, Namada is focused on optional data protection, this is very different from what TC offers. Also, TC has important legal risks that Namada doesnā€™t have since the focus is different. Why should we use 2M NAM in the community pool for this initiative that would likely lead to an increase legal risk also for Namada? I can see that of course receiving 2M NAM would be nice for TC but what are the benefits for Namada of this proposal? The only outcome I see is increased legal risks and regulatory scrutiny for Namada and I donā€™t really like this

2 Likes
3

I think defending the freedom of contributors to on-chain privacy is a great idea!

I guess there are two ways to go about this:

  1. Use rpgf/cpgf to contribute directly to the defences
  2. Incentivise based on eth (or other crypto) donations.

Pros and cons of option 1

Pros

  • Network effects of sending nam to people outside the network
  • More precise donation effort (it will be difficult to assess a-priori how much eth will be donated to each defence, and there is a bit more game-theory involved)

Cons

  • Would require NAM to have value in time for the defence
  • Is less straightforward for the recipients
  • More difficult to assess today how much NAM is going to help in the defence (but could therefore be a cpgf stream that can be increased or decreased with steward supervision)

Pros and cons of option 2

Pros

  • Donations are directly accessible by the defence
  • Donations ex-post are easy to measure value from

Cons

  • Game theory involved, which will depend highly upon how incentives are structured
  • No new NAM users / network effects

I donā€™t know which is a better alternative, but I would like to make some suggestions on @Gavin 's proposed method for option 2.

Suggestions for eth donation incentives

  1. Instead of users entering their tnam in the donation, I would propose that we collect all eth addresses that have made donations, and then ā€œairdropā€ them based on their Eth/other crypto address. They will then be prompted to create a new tnam address / ibc address for where the funds will go (idk if we can do pgf over the eth bridge or not). This allows for network effects of introducing new people to Namada, and doesnā€™t disqualify people who have already donated (it would be a shame not to reward Namada users that have already made a significant contribution). Also, if other protocols want to follow suit with Namada, then they can just use the list of addresses weā€™ve already collected. I can see a lot of other privacy protocols recognise this as a good idea, and Iā€™d like to make it as frictionless as possible for them to also do the exact same thing and we could really maximise the funding to the defence.

  2. I donā€™t think it would make sense to use cpgf (streaming) for what really is something retro-active (people have donated to the defence, they should be rewarded lump-sum). If we go with option 1, then cPGF is a more viable alternative, in my opinion. Further, if we use cpgf for option 2, it can be removed at any time through governance, and there will need to be a governance proposal to pass its removal once the 2m NAM have been streamed, I believe? Seems complicated.

  3. Why split the funding pro-rata? How would we go about this? The proposal would have to be made on various occasions, and the proposal would have to pass on each occasion. There is no guarantee of that happening.

  4. Should we reward the people who go through the effort of making this campaign possible? Itā€™s a public good in itself at the end of the day.

Summary

A fantastic idea, and one we should think about carefully, in order to make the biggest impact per NAM donated.

4

Zcash has optional data protection similar to Namada, just Namada extends this to IBC assets. Zcash didnā€™t have legal issues like TC, or at least not major recent ones. A lot of emphasis has been done to clarify that Namada is focused on optional data protection, and now we havenā€™t even launched the mainnet, still in the phase 1, and now we start inaccurately talking about ā€˜privacyā€™ and ā€˜defendingā€™ and supporting the legal defence of a project with a very different focus than Namada and risking making regulators confused about Namada? The top priority is Namada, its mainnet launch and success and managing well the communications about optional data protection to manage risks and explain clearly that Namada is very different from TC and it is focused on optional data protection for users, businesses, enabling better use cases with blockchain technology as in the traditional Web2 where there are also strong data protection regulations for users. Then in the future we can think about defending and protecting other projects, but nobody canā€™t be protected if Namada doesnā€™t succeed in the first place because we make regulators confused about what Namada is and does via these types of ideas

1 Like
5

I believe this opinion is very valid. I think itā€™s a fine line between saying Namada supports the approach TC took to privacy and TCā€™s ideology in general, and providing financial support to a legal defence that is prosecuting the founders in ways that (and this is my opinion alone) do not seem constitutional. If we canā€™t separate the two ideas (legal defence from TCā€™s ideology) it becomes trickier.

6

edit: updated this on Dec 11 to be Coin Center, but a lot of the same things apply from this post

tl;dr
We can use Namada PGF to incentivize people to contribute to advocacy thatā€™s needed to get fair rulingsā€“rulings that will affect our vision and mission. It allows us to show off Namadaā€™s tech, distribute pre-market NAM to aligned stakeholders, and attract high quality attention to Namada that could go viral :space_invader:

Weā€™re at an inflection point, with excitement building around this renaissance. The Nov 26 Fifth Circuit court ruling shook things up, and now high profile people are bringing attention and excitement to peer-to-peer privacy and data security. Letā€™s keep the momentum going :fire: :fire:

(More tweet examples: 1 | 2 | 3)

Legal findings like the recent Fifth Circuit Court ruling will affect how digital privacy is practiced and thus (imo) the adoption of blockchain tech at scale. The campaign title and messaging should reinforce this, and it should be fun :person_cartwheeling:

Itā€™s also an opportunity to ramp up the post-launch Namada momentum :ocean:
If this campaign pops off and goes viral, it would attract attention and energy around Namada ahead of Phase 5. PGF shouldnā€™t be boring :person_shrugging:

It will show people that amidst dysfunctional ā€œDAOs,ā€ the Namada community can coordinate to be effective :handshake:

Letā€™s get NAM into the hands of aligned people before thereā€™s a market, showcasing Namadaā€™s novel PGF mechanism for token distribution :fireworks: People will talk about it and want to copy it.

LFG!!

1 Like
7

I completely agree with Hector. We can achieve excellent marketing results with 2M NAM. Once we establish a solid foundation, we can focus on other goals, including protecting privacyā€”but not in this way. This approach is too risky and a double-edged sword that could potentially harm Namada and all of us. We cannot jeopardize Namada by associating it with TC in any way. Such a connection would pose significant risks and undermine the integrity of the project. I am 100% certain that if this happens, many of us will stop supporting Namada including me . We are here to promote privacy in a legal and responsible way, not to jeopardize our reputations, businesses, or the long-term success of the project.

1

8

Wouldnā€™t contributing to their success strengthen the case for Namada?
Iā€™ve heard they made progress, but perhaps coming up short support-wise?

This is like helping the runner pass the finishline?
:running_man:

Should it be so that we allow fear (false evidence appearing real) among the folks here holding stake in Namadaā€™s success hold us back from rewarding contributors? What would you like to see if the tables were turned?

This kind of thing tickles the part of me that thinks; what are we really in this for? Legal precedence favoring TC (and ultimately data protection) is worth way more than marketing :grin:

2 Likes
9

Could you please explain the reasons behind your concerns?

10

edit: okay i see the reputational risk

I donā€™t see the legal risk. Is it illegal somewhere to contribute to a personā€™s legal defence costs?

Benefits to Namada: Idea: use PGF to airdrop NAM to donors to Coin Center šŸ”„ - #6 by Gavin

1 Like
11

@cryptosj you mention that we can achieve excellent marketing results with 2m NAM. Do you have suggestions?

12

I understand that this approach could generate significant buzz around Namada, and I appreciate the intention to champion privacy as a core value. However, associating Namada with Tornado Cash even in indirect way and its founder could send a problematic message.

For many, TC is not just a privacy tool , it is perceived as a mixer often linked to money laundering and other illicit activities. Even an indirect association with TC could create a negative impression among:

Potential Users: Those who value privacy but also expect compliance with legal frameworks may view Namada less favorably.

Regulators: Authorities might see Namada as facilitating or endorsing questionable activities, inviting unnecessary scrutiny.

Validators, Contributors, and Community Members: They could feel that such a connection risks their reputation, legal standing, or commitment to ethical privacy solutions.

While I fully support the mission of privacy preservation, it is crucial to differentiate Namada from projects like TC, which have faced legal and reputational challenges.

Marketing Ideas:

Although Iā€™m not a marketing expert, here are some constructive alternatives for leveraging the 2M NAM to promote Namada:

Collaborate with Privacy-First Companies: Partner with projects like Brave Browser or ProtonMail to promote Namada as a legal, privacy-focused blockchain.

Sponsor Blockchain Events : Support blockchain conferences or organize Namada-branded hackathons to drive awareness around privacy-preserving technologies.

Offer Scholarships and Prizes: Use NAM to reward students and professionals working on innovative solutions in privacy and cryptography.

Incentivize Development: Allocate funds to developers building dApps and tools for Namada, such as a mobile wallet or other ecosystem-enhancing solutions.

These approaches not only uphold Namadaā€™s core values but also build trust with users, regulators, and the broader blockchain community.

2 Likes
13

helpful, thank you!

like i mentioned in Discord, i think iā€™m convinced that itā€™s not worth the risk of tying Namadaā€™s brand to TCā€™s reputation

keen to keep brainstorming! :cloud_with_lightning:

4 Likes
14

Iā€™ve updated the topic to focus on Coin Center instead

15

1 million NAM is only 2% of the annual budget, but this first campaign is going to set a standard. That is why I would like Namadaā€™s first mainnet PGF to reach several goals.

  • Donating a large amount to Coin Center
  • Spreading the word about Namada
  • Getting support and goodwill from all layers, not either influencers, whales or farmers
  • Preventing exploitation of the airdrop
  • Avoiding controversy
  • Manifesting the value of Namada
  • Making it happen before Phase 5

Donating a large amount to Coin Center

Vitalik donated $1 million worth of ETH. Would be nice to match that amount.
Yes, that means a target of at least $1 donated per 1 NAM airdropped.

Spreading the word about Namada

We could simply give Coin Center an account with 1 million NAM in it, but I am afraid they do not know what to do with it and it will be forgotten. They may not even post about. Remember that before Phase 5, NAM cannot be moved and has no market value. A primary goal besides supporting the cause is to increase Namada awareness and the number of NAM holders. Therefore the campaign needs to have an element of virality.

Getting support and goodwill from all layers, not either influencers, whales or farmers

  • If we do a referral code campaign, most NAM will go to influencers and bot farms.
  • A linear campaign, the more you donate the more NAM you get, means most NAM goes to people with a lot of money.

Ideally this campaign gives each individual the same opportunity.

Preventing exploitation of the airdrop

In addition to somewhat equal distribution, the airdrop needs to be safe from flaws that allows an attacker to claim the whole budget.

Avoiding controversy

Aside from preventing exploits that make Namada look stupid, it would be advisable to support palatable causes. The goal is to increase Namadaā€™s clout so we can continue to fund public goods with increasing impact. This is not a matter of having guts or being timid, but about strategic self-preservation. And yes, I know edginess tends to go viral, but it can and often does backfire spectacularly.

Manifesting the value of Namada

The value of cryptocurrencies is often based on hype, conviction and attention, not so much on fundamentals and business models. Case in point, half of the top 100 coins are pump.fun meme tokens. I believe imagination has a huge influence and we are able to manifest value.

ā€œGive $3 = get 1 NAMā€

Why care about value? A high value increases interest in the protocol and serves the flywheel that gives our public good funding more firepower. Imagine we can raise $3 million in donations to crypto advocacy with our first campaign!

Making it happen before Phase 5

The campaign should be done by Phase 5, so we get more NAM holders on board before people start mathing and gaming the system. Also we still have up to 98% of the budget to allocate, so we cannot spend too much time on this campaign.

2 Likes
17

amazing, ty!

agree with all except directionality of manifesting value

itā€™s more exciting to get pre-market exposure opportunities at low valuations, and more exciting yet if the donors continue to participate beyond a low valuation

18