Proposal: KIP 13 - Immigration Policy

Kong Improvement Proposal

All sections are required. If they are not applicable, please write N/A.
Once your proposal is ready for public feedback, post to the Kong Forum with a summary RFC and a timeline.

When the timeline has passed, message the @senate in the #kip channel to finalize the proposal for snapshot

KIP-13

Goal:

To recruit additional high-quality contributors to Kong via an immigration policy

Single Point of Contact: (Only 1 individual for Senate to reach out with questions, and to represent at Bi-weekly Forum.)

#0027

Sponsors:

Include folks planning to work on this proposal. Do not include folks who are just supportive of this proposal.

#0027, #0048, #1002

Description:

In order to rapidly increase the number of individuals contributing secure element manufacturing and distribution, application development, and the growth of Kong as a crypto-state more broadly, we must implement a swift and clear path to citizenship. We wish to increase the amount of $CTZN authorized for distribution by the senate from 50 quarterly to 500 quarterly, giving the Senate a little over two years to distribute the current stock of $CTZN.

The alpha token currently prices out many potential citizens, and the nation’s stock of $CTZN token is locked in treasury, or otherwise distributed to alphas, until a formal proposal can be passed. Drawing inspiration from several other DAOs in the appendix, here we propose to offer multiple paths of entry into Kong:

  1. For Chip Purchasers
  • We wish to offer a fast path to entry for individuals who are already consuming and building on top of the Kong ecosystem. For individuals who order a batch of chips and sign content to them, we should make an earnest offer of citizenship
  1. For Direct Buyers and DAOs
  • In order to diversify the capital holdings of Kong, it is important to offer a more attractive entrypoint to individuals who are fans of Kong but who have not yet pulled together funds to purchase an alpha citizenship.
  • This also provides a road to exchange governance tokens with other DAOs
  1. For Secondary Market Buyers
  • To create a secondary market to eliminate $CTZN dust amounts and off-ramp unhappy citizens, we propose to make a balancer pool denominated in $ETH, eventually $LAND
  1. For Strategic Recruitment
  • There are a number of individuals who have already contributed to KONG who deserve citizenship, but we have been unable to offer it to them, this allotment would be dedicated to a specific recruitment initiative
  1. For Bounty Hunters
  • There are a number of tasks that can be done on behalf of Kong by motivated individuals who desire citizenship, and as such we wish to allot tokens for the purpose of incensing bounty development and completion
  1. For Hackathon Participants
  • A strong element of the recruitment process to date has been conference attendance and in-person demonstrations. We wish to leverage this success with specific prizes of citizenship for hackathon participants.
  1. For Developer Advocacy
  • To drive greater awareness and understanding of KONG tech, its use cases, and more experimentaion and integrations, we need capable advocates who can effectively engage with technical audiences. We wish to incentivize the recruitment of these dev advocates with a small share of total citnzenship.
  1. For Marketing Promotions
  • It is difficult to build hype with only 250 citizens, we wish to incentivize evangelism and amplification with a small share of the total citizenship

It is worth noting that many citizens were in favor of a visa-like program or path to citizenship. An easy implementation of this program within the confines of this proposal is to make it practice to award fractional $CTZN to contributors, so that they may accrue $CTZN over time and convert to a full NFT once they have acquired a whole token. Such fractional tokens could also be used to gate access to the Discord.

Benefits:

Increasing the supply of citizens contributing to the Kong mission will undoubtedly provide a diversity of new initiatives that will generate further demand for Halos and Silos, accelerate adoption and growth of the underlying technologies, and increase the capabilities of Kong as a whole.

Additionally, these tokens represent the capability to exchange governance tokens with other DAOs and potential collaborators, and to create demand for the existing tokens and contracts in the Kong ecosystem.

Success Metrics:

  1. KPIs before proposal:
  • NFT IDs over 1000: ~10
  • Average weekly forum attendance: 12
  • github/kong-org stars: 14
  1. KPIs after proposal:
  • NFT IDs over 1000: 20% growth in CTZN monthly
  • Average weekly forum attendance: 15% growth monthly
  • github/kong-org stars: 10% growth monthly
  1. Success Confidence:
    (If this proposal was executed 100 times, how many times will it meet its goal?)
  • 70%

Duration:

  • Start: 2022.07.04
  • End: When the last $CTZN token has been issued

Tokens Requested: (Treasury control) (Treasury Guidance)

  1. $CTZN Total: 1500
  • For Chip Purchasers: 500
  • For Direct Sale and Exchange: 300
  • For Strategic Recruitment: 250
  • For Bounty Hunters: 200
  • For Hackathon Participants: 100
  • For Developer Advocacy: 50
  • For Marketing Promotions: 50
  • For Liquidity Pool: 50
  1. (Request for needed resources to complete the proposal, e.g. ETH)

  2. $ETH Total: 0.30
    * For Expenses: 0.30

Token Distribution: (Sponsors’ control)

  1. $CTZN
  • 1_500 CTZN allocated as requested
  • 500 CTZN to Senate quarterly for citizen referrals (“buddy drop”)
  1. $ETH
  • 0.30

    1. Pay for balancer pool and swap fees
    2. If less, will be returned to DAO

RISKS: (Open to All Members)

  1. By #0027
  • We have set an aggressive growth schedule here at 20% MoM, which could dilute some of the high quality we’ve come to expect from the DAO. There is also a risk in offering the tokens for sale in that we will not be aligning ourselves with builders, but more likely simple speculators
  1. By #1002
  • What about infiltrators (is there anything to infiltrate?…)

COUNTERPOINTS: (Open to All Members)

  1. By vnbpa
  • “visas” should have a clear purpose. Is it just learning about and experiencing KONG besides full citizenship? What is there to learn/experience that people could not understand from open source research? Building? Governance? Apprenticeship? Content creation? This requires thinking about implementation in the creation phase.
  • A “visa” should be relatively easy to obtain (within parameters) and should be convertible to CTZN. So, the parameters for obtaining a “visa” could be as simple as POH or ZK proofs + POH. Requiring people to lock stakes and do other technical (or semi-technical) things potentially excludes people who might have non-technical contributions to make. Plus, what incentive do people have to lock stakes or take financial risk if this is just learning about the ecosystem and potentially contributing?
  • The “visa” should be convertible to CTZN and that process should be clear, simple, and decentralized. I strongly disagree with the trend towards centralizing this type of decision in bodies like an “immigration committee”. For example, the person might need a certain amount of non-fungible reputational credibility (similar to what @ramicaza mentions, or some other measure) to mint a CTZN. This would ensure that people converting to CTZN have already been active and vetted (to a degree) by their community participation. There are also already governance measures baked in to kick people out, if needed, so making the entry in should be simple and decentralized, which should in turn attract a diverse range of potential contributors.
  1. By #0048
  • Are there concerns around the liquidity of $CTZN w.r.t. recruits? Is there encouragement to burn into $CITIZEN whereby they can participate in voting?

ADMIN: FOR TREASURY:

Transactions Upon Passing:

  • Send 1_500 $CTZN
    • From: Treasury Gnosis Multisig
    • To: Senate Gnosis Multisig
  • Send 0.30 $ETH
    • From: Treasury Gnosis Multisig
    • To: Senate Gnosis Multisig

https://badge.orangedao.xyz/

https://www.notion.so/Create-With-Us-27ef28846bfd4f8a933166e784b9db9f

https://forms.gle/2ruMCaZ9JhsLRLcX9

https://www.fwb.help/join/tips

https://www.raidguild.org/join

1 Like

Thanks to the Senate for taking the time to put this together.

Some comments:

• I believe the biggest ROI (in terms of time and $CTZN expenditure) will be supporting projects that use the chips. HaLos and by extension ERS are Kong’s USP and clearest reason as to why an individual or organization would want to invest their time. That isn’t to say that the other paths suggested e.g. " 2. For Direct Buyers and DAOs" aren’t relevant but I believe path 1. is deserves the most energy.

• I agree that visas, if used, should be easy to obtain and have clear, documentable paths to citizenship based on on-chain metrics.

• Building utility and benefits into holders of Alpha, Titan and regular citizenship is a must. I understand this is a chicken/egg problem right now but, for any projects, individuals or initiatives that can add utility and value to citizenship above and beyond current tangible benefits should be given priority.

• The current budget is a lot of $CTZN at a time where it has no liquid market. Can we apply the success metrics earlier in the process rather than later with a clear threshold for abort?

2 Likes

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. re: the last bullet, I’m not following the connection between $CTZN having a liquid market and the need to apply success metrics earlier. Regardless of whether $CTZN has/doesn’t have a liquid market, I’m in agreement that we should regularly review how success metrics are tracking.

1 Like

Thank for the feedback:

  1. For Direct Buyers and DAOs" aren’t relevant but I believe path 1. is deserves the most energy.

How would you change the allocation? The KIP already proposes 1/3 of all allocated tokens for chip buyers, and a 5:3 proportion for these two carve outs specifically.

I agree that visas, if used, should be easy to obtain and have clear, documentable paths to citizenship based on on-chain metrics.

I have started a small guideline proposal open to feedback in Treasury Guidance included in the proposal. This is a living document and not binding in any sense, but meant to give people ballpark estimates for token allocations in their proposals. Does the ~40 hours of work issuance per citizenship make sense from your perspective?

The current budget is a lot of $CTZN at a time where it has no liquid market. Can we apply the success metrics earlier in the process rather than later with a clear threshold for abort?

Would you like to see different success metrics or a more specific re-evaluation period? Realistically, we have 5 months left in the senate term (which I am calling a saeculum for thematic purposes), and is a natural point to re-evaluate whether the immigration policy is being executed on successfully.

If you would prefer to re-evaluate at 3 months, then what conflict resolution would you propose? My hunch is that it would look a lot like putting up a proposal and a snapshot vote to abort KIP-13 and stop the issuance schedule.

We do have another pending proposal to outline more specific governance and org structure, but while we were drafting it we thought it was important to get more recruits to make the org structure meaningful, which is why this proposal was published first. Perhaps we can include this review model in the org structure proposal.

Thanks for pinging back. I should have made clear my assumption. That is, I’m assuming the supply of $CTZN is to some extent the “wealth” of the DAO. Sales of $CTZN at a future date to parties wanting to join KL will help fund yet-to-be-known initiatives. My reference to market depth is based on the fact that there is none, and by giving away a lot of $CTZN before it finds a price and value in the market might be premature.

1 Like

Hey, thanks for digging in to this.

  1. For Direct Buyers and DAOs" aren’t relevant but I believe path 1. is deserves the most energy.

How would you change the allocation? The KIP already proposes 1/3 of all allocated tokens for chip buyers, and a 5:3 proportion for these two carve outs specifically.

I’m not suggesting a change rather, I am stating my support of the idea. I think at least 1/3 of whatever the allocation ends up being is a good place to start.

The current budget is a lot of $CTZN at a time where it has no liquid market. Can we apply the success metrics earlier in the process rather than later with a clear threshold for abort?

Would you like to see different success metrics or a more specific re-evaluation period? Realistically, we have 5 months left in the senate term (which I am calling a saeculum for thematic purposes), and is a natural point to re-evaluate whether the immigration policy is being executed on successfully.

Good question and I see your point about aligning with the saeculum interval. That said, if I had to make a choice between time vs quality I’d choose time and set it to 10 weeks with the existing metrics.

1 Like