BSL CU Onboarding Seed Rewards

Proposal Discussion
,
1

The Delegate/BankSocial Meeting notes are pending and will be posted when complete but I wanted to begin this discussion now.

The solution to the SLP sells is being worked on and will be ready to be turned back on to continue the normal contributions in the future.

In order to prevent impacting the price negatively a couple of options have been discussed but our latest meeting had one of the best scenarios brought up. By taking the currently accumulated $BSL and creating a reward pool that incentivizes CU members to join and explore the BankSocial/BSL ecosystem, it will help to grow The BSLDAO membership, provide incentive to join the discussions, and provide exposure to the token that might otherwise not be recognized.

Most people were specifically against selling the stack, I agree, especially with the impact that would have on the token price in these uncertain times and “early” life of the project as a whole.

So, with BankSocial team running the marketing to their CU partners/members, we can use the funds to seed accounts and interest in the project/DAO, while minimizing the direct sell impact. Additionally, it would only go to those CU members that complete the onboarding process into the BankSocial ecosystem, so we know it would actually be real people…

Alternatively a hybrid distribution/reward pool model could be implemented, but the simple and easiest way to move forward is to scrape the allocated $BSL into the SLP wallet, turn back on the sells, and move forward with this plan. Unfortunately, Ive seen a lot of decision fatigue when we start creating 3-4-5-10 different solutions…

So… I would like to put this one to discussion.

3 Likes
2

I’m all for it. I love the idea of incentivizing CU members to join our DAO. It sets us up for a very strong future.

1 Like
3

Yup I like that idea. We need to onboard more people, that incentive should help

1 Like
4

I think before we give out free BSL to onboard new members we first need to reimburse the stolen token SLP contributions to the appropriate holders. Not doing this is morally wrong, those specific funds are the result of a crime and measures need to be taken to correct what we can.

2 Likes
5

I agree with refunding funds contributed to the SLP due to members being exploited, if they go through the BankSocial investigtion process.

It is definitely a conversation to continue to work out the details on but I don’t feel this should be holding up CU member seeding.

7

As part of this, are we planning to track and share some simple conversion metrics — for example:

• % of seeded CU members who stake
• 30/60/90 day retention
• whether SLP participation meaningfully increases

I think having visibility into that would help us understand whether this is driving structural growth vs just distribution.

2 Likes
8

That would be something we can ask for. Set some KPIs for seeing if its worth continuing to seed.

3 Likes
9

All for this. Let’s make it so.

10

This is an interesting option. My knee jerk reaction is, there is no guarantee people wont just cash in the free tokens.
We are in an economic down turn, fast becoming a crisis. I feel like people will lean towards cashing in… just my two cents.

However, the liquidity crunch creates many opportunities to provide loans to struggling entities, due diligence of-coarse.

we could open an account at the Texas Bullion Depository and ride to precious metal wave till the storm passes or some other opportunity presents itself.

There are diverse openings in the emerging markets to facilitate inclusion and financial access.

Not to looking over the fence, still, have we considered how/why metal is making such strides and gaining market share.