Proposal #3 (6): MintGate for Non-Players/Non-Patrons

We should limit the minting participation to players & patrons only.

Currently, anyone who sets their address in Discord gets activated and appears on the ledger for $SEED minting, defeating the purpose of “earning the player role”.

Mechanics - Abstract:

Limit the set-eth-address channel visibility to player/patron only. This way, only those who truly engage and align can earn the right to get on the ledger. It would reduce attempts at gamifying/farming cred with low quality, inconsistent content/presence/discourse.

Furthermore, it increases the filtering of future octos by aligning them with our approach. We make sure they build for the public good, not for profits. We discourage speculation and reward-seeking behaviour. We seek people looking for personal growth & networking opportunities.

Another problem of the current system is dilution of the seed distribution resulting in many identities receiving extremely small amounts that aren’t worthwhile claiming considering gas prices. All those seeds that came from low effort/quality participation would be spread out to actual active members if they weren’t of the ledger.

Engaged Octo’s will still be earning XP based on their activity and contributions. However, only by earning the player role will they be able to claim their earned $SEED. This would prove their intentions and alignment, reduce ledger clutter and incentivize sticking-around and buidling.

PROS
-more seeds for players, less seeds for speculators
-clear distinction between Engaged Octo’s & Players
-filtering increase (only aligned become players)
-makes us more proactive in activating and deactivating people based on activity
-will incentivize consistency/involvement
-it makes that being a part of the “300 of MetaGame” mean something; it is a thing to be proud of, to work for and not something freely handed out to all who show a little interest.

CONS
-we might not convert as many Engaged Octo’s to Players
-we might lose activity and interest from current Engaged Octo’s
-some players might disagree with this decision
-takes more productive focus in monitoring people based on activity
-introduces a form of gatekeeping

CONCLUSION
-It is proposed to gate the address linking from non-players/non-patrons until they graduate
-An announcement should be made to let the community prepare
-It is proposed to go into effect on August 1st, 2021
-It is proposed to have a 1 or 2 week window for existing trial Octo’s before being deactivated
-Those who should be purged anyways are unaffected.

This proposal is an echo of the community and I’m merely the messenger & supporter
What say ye, metafam?

11 Likes

As long as the patron price is only 8 pSEED, there is still a way to get in on minimal work or cost. So i think this proposal is needed to help preserve the seat of the 300 and it’s value.

3 Likes

exactly, since we’re still bellow the patron cap, it makes sense to keep it that way until the req. becomes more than the last on the leaderboard

1 Like

From Engaged octo side I agree.

Makes sense & at 20 XP to become a player over 2 weeks thats definitely reasonable

I think the main problem with this is that testing roles have no idea how much their contributions would be worth then.
The purpose of the testing period is kind of twofold: for us to test newcomers but also for newcomers to test metagame. If they “test” metagame but don’t get to see how much they would actually earn, it kind of defeats the purpose of them testing it :man_shrugging:

3 Likes

That’s a good point.

Could we show them how much have active players, who earned roughly the same amount of XP, earned in SEED during the latest mint? Or something along those lines.

We’d be showing them real data, so as to give them a feel for how much their contributions would have been worth had they joined a month earlier. Should serve as a nice incentive for them to keep contributing!

2 Likes

i had hit enter as if i was in discord and never posted this, @Davor kinda echoes what i wanted to say but here’s the whole thing anyway :stuck_out_tongue:
"That’s a fair point but in a sense even us actives have no real clue how much we’ll get untill the calcs come. I think it’s ok to know how much you’ll get paid if that’s what you’re referring to with “test” but I will also note that it’s kind of a weird position—>we want people who don’t join just to make money, but want to allow them to see if their time here will be paid enough? Do we attract people with monetary wealth or our mission/vision? I’m not saying they don’t deserve to be paid, just voicing this distinction

what about- hey look we’'ll be minting next week, these are the calcs that show how much you would’ve gotten if you were an active player."

2 Likes

Or we could change their weight of total seed/xp ratio according to their role level. Or allow release of earned seed upon specified role level.

2 Likes

i think seed/xp ratio can’t be redacted, it depends on your emoji in-out game. (not 100% sure)

1 Like

Ditto. We want people who will feel inspired by the vision and mission behind MetaGame. I consider myself one of such players/patrons. My top 3 reasons for playing are purely intrinsic—1) vision & mission, 2) the people of MetaGame, 3) the process—while SEED rewards are a nice additional bonus.

Renumeration is crucial, and it feels amazing when SEED mints are done in a predictable, regular way. However, it shouldn’t be anyone’s #1 reason for being here, IMHO. These players will be the first ones to abandon ship on the first sign of any storm, and there will always we storms to weather on this “plane we’re building while we’re flying it” :wink:

That said, this idea of previewing what an engaged octo will likely have earned with their contributions falls somewhere in the middle of two extremes, one being “doing nothing”, and the other “immediately paying them out, while they’re still on their tryouts”.

4 Likes

Maybe I can gather some data from my first month, based on average contribution, and aligning with the community.
And you can provide that as a perview, but not set in stone, as someone can earn 300xp in one week someone can earn 20xp. So it’s individual, but it can serve as a normal purpose not showing anything sky high or too low.

What do you think?

1 Like

I definitely agree with this.
To fix the problem of not being able to check xp maybe we can change the requirements.

The Guild champion of the guild the engaged octo joined would be aware of their contributions.
Also they need to be present at an x amount of meets of the guild.
We can go over the engaged octo’s during the champions ring meet

Curious what you guys/girls think of this

1 Like

Could we perhaps set up a slightly customised distribution for Engaged Octos?
(They get a locked non-transferable token which can be used to redeem SEEDs from a contract, if they collect some significant amount of XP, or become Patrons/Players?)

*this might be too much work, but I think this might help in removing anyone that’s not value oriented.

2 Likes

And to sorta ensure that we don’t waste too much gas, maybe this can be done on xdai, and they can claim xSEED from the proposed contract? (I think as a start this process can sorta represent potential monetary incentives in adding value to Metagame and give them a ‘test run’ of Metagame)
Cons:

  • Might need us to onboard Engaged Octos to xdai
  • This may potentially look slightly shady to new contributors(esp. when we have a separate distribution, on a different chain)
  • It might lead to us needing more dev-work, and maintenance work (I think we would have to make our own Dapp for a different distribution (or maybe use some other tools like Colony?, if that can somehow be configured to work with this process?))
  • More maintenance work, and potential loop-holes in the minting process, which might need someone to cross-check if everyone getting their seeds minted is a player/patron or not.

Isn’t the purpose of #set-eth-address not only to allow someone to register an ETH address but also to connect their accounts for the calculation of XP.

I’m looking at @TomBalls account currently and I’m pretty sure the issue is that the account he’s been checking isn’t connected to the account where he’s been getting XP from GitHub.

Eventually the account connection system was to move over to the IdentityLink system from 3Box, so when a user registered with MyMeta it’d connect everything, but that’s on hold awaiting both an instance of the server being run by dns.xyz and changes to SourceCred.

Yes, I agree with the premise of this. It seems only Players should be able to earn, otherwise what’s the point of aiming to be a Player?

Have we thought through the means of implementation? Sometimes this sort of thing is not as easy as it seems like it should be.

1 Like

The base actionable I think we have is defining the requirements for becoming a player without it being a checklist. In regards to implementation, I’d love to hop on a call with you wizards to see the best way for implementing the idea: Be able to track xp without automagically being in the distribution.

Since the way it is aligned with the minting (including the proposed grace period of 2 weeks) the idea was to remove the permission to view set eth address from non players and non patrons and deactivate existing ones after the grace period.
Engaged Octo becoming an opt-in trial role where they agree that their contribution rewards will be available only if they plan on becoming a full member. We can handle bounties in a different fashion for individual contributions should we wish so (tip.cc or direct payout from the multisig, etc). Those who prove that are aligned would be activated and thus included in the distribution.

Don’t want to make a wall of text here but would love to discuss this, either on the champs call today or I’ll hop on the builders call on wednesday, not sure of your agenda/schedule. I’ve done some scribble here indicating an overhaul I see as suitable for this change and would explain further my incoherence there XD

1 Like

Looks like that could be changing here, like WHALE and 1337, which i have wholeheartedly been against and vocalized it in those communities until elitism won out in the end. Entry to MG in a perpetual upward move would eventually be impossible as no one who wants to enter, in say 10 years down the road, as the number of pSEED required for entry as a patron will have grown exponentially, assuming we stay the course as a community. If we look at things with a future-centric perspective, we should be able to see that we eventually X out all non-members from ever entering MG.