I think gating the token minting from engaged octos to prevent people from gaming the system & incentivizing engaged octos to become players was a great idea but there is a downside worth considering.
What about the people that are definitely not trying to game the system but also won’t go through the trouble of becoming players?
The kind of people this includes:
Leaders of other DAOs that come to MetaGame to give us a talk or a workshop
Random twitter thought leaders that we get to submit playbooks
Random contractors that want to solve a problem & be gone
Ways we could solve this:
Fast track them to Players (afaik people don’t need to actually attend the cohort, only need to create 20xp? Someone says a single impactful didathing is enough to get 20xp but maybe we could also lower it a bit for these kind of people?)
Create a new “guest” role or something that would be enabled in minting but wouldn’t get all the same access as players
Originally I was thinking the best solution would be to create this new role but upon more thought I think it might be better to help them fast track through cohort or make sure they receive enough XP to make it.
This way, there’s a small chance that they will do something else impactful.
But also, a chance that they will be converted to patrons when the purge comes
It was suggested that the people giving talks should just be sent Seeds directly but imo this makes it meh because it makes the relationship completely transactional & might even be offensive to them if they don’t get the kind of pay they usually expect for their expertise.
Having them to post in #did-a-thing and there we emoji them would be awesome.
Why? Because these one-time supporters will get to know the MetaGame way. Emojis reflect emotions, thus coming back to check how many reactions you got generates dopamine, which will increase the probs to make them remember it.
This experience will give them a topic of conversation, questions on the process behind SEED minting, and eventually attract them to collaborate.
I say: Yea. Let’s have this fast-track path. Nay to give SEEDs without being Players.
This doesn’t really have any relation to “MintGate” aside sharing a cool name imho :P.
The problem you’re mentioning is a core problem of our sourcecred setup, not our player gates—>single contribution payouts are simply hard to reward properly. Meaning, if they post a did-a-thing after their single contribution, they will be eligible for a whooping 1 seed (if)
We should keep in mind tho that a significant factor when implementing it was mainnet gas fees and distributing/claiming said 1 (one) seed, which now on polygon isn’t an issue anymore so there’s that.
The relationship is transactional for them if they do not wish to participate in any other manner as you claim with the playbooks example, is it not? ( They don’t want to play or be players, they just want to write a playbook and be gone as you wrote while we hope they will contribute again sometime in the future?)
Leaders of Daos can have the embassy role (we can have that role activated in sc)
imho the solution if we want to go down the freelancer route is making a basket of seeds–>dedicate a percentage of total mint for guests and disperse each month
(this can be found here XP/dependencies.json at master · MetaFam/XP · GitHub)
That way they can get compensated. (a praise in give-props will happen in any case). BONUS: Let’s have this excuse to try out coordinape. I think it could work well with contractors and single contributions in general. (We decide with coordinapes “give” how much of the basket goes where)
I would also say that I wouldn’t view members with single contributions rogues(A rogue should be active. On it’s own terms, but active.). Also, the purpose of cohorts is to understand metagame and learn the ins and outs while finding your place and becoming an active contributor. Fast tracking them through that just to get paid seems counter intuitive.
I think introducing an additional tentacle in our mechanism would be a better experience as opposed to cheating through the existing ones. What’s the difference between not being a player because you didn’t cross the path and being one synthetically (you still didn’t cross the path). The idea is not to have the player role to be on the mint list. It’s to be everything that being a player means, which is then represented with the “Player” role.
PS: My super salty cynical thought:
If you do something for free no strings attached; we reward you and you get offended because it’s not the industry standard, you appear to be heavily disconnected from our ethos
Yes! It’s for making a bridge that goes over the mintgates
I’m pretty sure some players receive up to 5-10 Seeds per didathing.
Single contribution payouts are easier to reward properly than consistent contribution & short term contributors often do better than regular players…
Its not for attracting freelancers but experts in whatever field, whether they have a job or not.
They don’t come here to freelance but to contribute - meaning they’re not expecting to get paid.
Why would we want to complicate & limit the percentage of total mints?
Imo it makes way more sense to do this based on function (eg. community vs building) than whether someone is “an outsider” or not. Whoever creates value should get paid.
If I understood coordinape correctly, its better used for fixed teams than one-off contributors.
I agree there is a difference between player rogues & guest rogues, guest rogues definitely wouldn’t be considered players & given everything that players have.
Its worth thinking about more, but for starters, maybe the guest roles should have limited channels & shouldn’t be able to post in #didathing but only receive props.
If not that, maybe the guest role should be auto removed after a week or something, where they are then encouraged to either become players or patrons.
Worth figuring out but yeah, definitely agree with you that they shouldn’t enjoy all the same privileges as the people that went through the process.
Maybe they get offended, maybe they realize MetaGame is poor & it makes them go think “oh damn, these people work for so little money, they are so dedicated!”
We have MetaFest Speaker roles
Talked about Ambassador roles multiple times
And now have champions with onboarder role rights of fast tracking those they know to be coming as an instant contributor
I don’t necessarily agree all should become players for one time Bridgebuilding.
Say hypothetically
2 guest speakers a week, plus one playbook. One workshop. That’s 16 players a month. That’s about half or a third of active current players. Sooo.
A separate role would help also when approaching any sort of Purge. To offer a pass since often they won’t maintain a constant contribution of 20xp per week and may make the cut list to be reviewed.
