I support the amendment to the contract for vesting pillars, in case of bad actors hijacking the A-Z funds. Would this be complicated to implement?
I think the vested pillar initiative is a good idea, as they were mentioned in older Medium articles but we were never given a way to implement them. My guess is that it would be up to us to find a way to grant vested pillars to KOLs and/or competent dev teams, in order to grow our network.
Attached is a screenshot with the only piece of information we have in regards to vested pillars:
Its always been my understanding that the vesting mechanism for a pillar like this included a revoke option that would be used based on the returned value to the network. So i like the idea and would really like to see an initiative like this built to gain visibility, but not a fan of gifting important infrastruture with only the hope that anything gets returned.
Seems backwards to what weve been trying to do with AZ.
This discussion is highly subject to projections and assumptions.
I have feelings all over the map about this. My feeling is based on who the imagined recipient might be. Obviously, Elon would be a huge win, and on the other end of the spectrum, someone tweeting Zenon once and then rugging, would be a huge L.
I think if someone wants to pursue this campaign that it is worth trying and seeing what crops up.
You’ll get nobody onboarded with such high demand on from them. Those guys are used to more easy terms. We have to adapt to the market of this kind of offers. Saying “Obviously they can decline” wont change the fact that you’ll onboard nobody. Think about it like the Epic Games marketing campaign for free games which started - I think - during the COVID. It effectively onboarded users. Sometimes, you have to turn them into the product rather than making them pay (with time, effort, whatever).
Here you buy a network, not a person to work for you.
It can’t be too easy, we need some kind of protection to ourselves and the A-Z funds by setting up a guideline. Or else we’d really be committing sudoku by giving out pilars for free…
It also weeds out the people that would troll anyway imo.
My sense is that Chadass has a vision in mind that we can’t quite see. I have confidence in his acumen and motivation to act rationally on behalf of his, and our shared interests, where they are shared.
I feel like the discussion is bringing some more resolution to the picture. Seems good to be bringing the general concept of VPs back.
Hah I’m proud that ZenonORG Pillars were one of the few to vote NO on that AZ, and the only ones to vote NO again when it came to funding. I’ve always warned the community about marketing AZ’s: Zenon Tools
But my experiences around TC tells me that select KOLs are one of the primary reasons why RUNE went from cents to dollars. I will share thoughts on the whole tomorrow.
If we bet on 10 person’s and 3 scam us I’ll still consider it a win. We paid a tremendous amount for websites with no questions regarding monthly visitors or increase in the brand reach, just saying.
Yeah, at least with vested pillars we’d be able to revoke them if the other party doesn’t hold their part of the bargain (if we implement it correctly).
Hoping we can get @sol and the rest of the HC1 team to help us out and get this initiative going!
So the idea is to offer pillars to various crypto influencers and say “Here’s free money. You can do whatever you want with this. No strings attached.”
And we’re expecting some of them to become interested in the network because we simped for them?
If we wanted to have a vesting mechanism it might require an update of the embedded SC but this is not absolutely critical imo.
Recipients will be hand picked based on strategic merit and, once they’re up, they will have to run pillars a certain amount of time in any case.
KOLs should be firms/partners that align with zenon’s vision.
Giving bags to proper KOLs to promote a project is a most elementary part of the crypto playbook if you want anyone to know you exist. That’s just a fact and denying it would be naive.
We literally wasted thiusands in znn on fake promises for banner ads (which are super low effect as every msrketer can tell you). An aversion against using KOLs who are so much more effective would be illogical.
We can also tier payouts so that every 5k znn / 50k qsr gets released once the KOL has converted X number of new community members to zenon, which we can measure thanks to attribute.me.
Yes there is a chance that partners will take the money and dump the coin but it will have been only after they delivered value. And instead of just paying them in coin there is an actual probability the paid coin is locked up and used to run pillars.
At the risk of repeating myself: not every KOL is a bad actor. A KOL is simply a person or firm with a community.
On your remark re: simping, I’d like to remind you how religiously Kaine’s five bullet point roadmap is being followed devoid of any market validation. And that after he dumped a half-baked protocol into the laps of volunteer community devs and after he caused a speculative pump around bitcoin interoperability he never delivered.
In this space noone is too good to use KOLs. They are the #1 growth vector for anything. Worth getting used to that.
