As part of the exploratory phase of designing the SAFE Token, we are currently identifying areas where the token can support the Safe{Core} Protocol to meet its objectives. To ensure exploring a broad set of avenues, we want to directly involve the community. This post is a request for input on the potential token utility.
The output that we can gather will be used to identify interactions and key stakeholder groups where the SAFE token could be leveraged. In addition, it will be used to shape the Safe Ecosystem Proposal (SEP) on token utility, which is another milestone towards token transferability under SEP #3 (Towards clarity on milestones before voting on enabling transferability again).
1. Guidelines
Before getting started, it is important that you get familiar with the Safe{Core} Protocol, as it will be used as the basis for the analysis. Relevant documentation:
- Safe{Core} Protocol Whitepaper
- Protocol Specifications
- Forum post on Safe{Core} Protocol whitepaper
- It’s important that any suggestion upholds the principles that are laid out in the SafeDAO Constitution
After having read the documentation, Section 2 (Mechanisms Exploration) covers the input that we are looking to gather from the community. To prepare for that, it might be helpful to go through an objectives and stakeholders discovery process that is laid out in Section 3 (Objectives and Stakeholders Discovery Framework). Section 4 gives an example of a submission and the final section gives some additional information.
2. Mechanisms Exploration
In this section we ask you to ideate on potential mechanisms that can be used to align incentives and facilitate coordination between these stakeholders.
Request 1: suggestions on potential mechanisms for the Safe Token. In particular, we are looking for ideas on primitives which can be leveraged in the context of the Safe{Core} Protocol such as, locking, burning, fee taking, staking etc., and references on past implementations of these primitives. There can be multiple mechanisms between stakeholders. Be as creative as possible, there is no right or wrong.
Request 2: Are there any projects worth looking at that have implemented the mechanisms that you identified in the prior table?
3. Objectives and Stakeholders Discovery Framework
To help prepare you for generating ideas on mechanisms, the high-level framework that is explained below might be useful. Starting from first principles, the process helps to summarize the objectives of the Safe{Core} Protocol, map out the key stakeholders and how the value can, in theory, be exchanged between them.
More concretely, the set of questions you can ask yourself are as follows:
- Objectives and Constraints: What are the objectives of Safe{Core} Protocol? What problems is it solving? What are the constraints?
- Stakeholder Mapping: Who are the most relevant stakeholders and what is their role/function? Why do they interact with the Safe{Core} Protocol? What are their interests in the protocol? How important are they for the Safe{Core} Protocol, i.e. what is their impact?
- Value Flow Between Stakeholders: What is the (non)-monetary value that is exchanged between different stakeholders? How do they each potentially benefit from the protocol?
Once you have done this preparatory exercise and are able to answer these questions, you should have a good understanding of all the stakeholders within the Safe{Core} Protocol and how they are interacting with each other. This should make it easier to come up with creative ideas on token utility that (dis)incentivize behavior and strengthen the Safe{Core} Protocol.
4. Example Submission
To clarify the framework and our request, please see below an example of what a submission could look like. Note that we ask you to provide as many examples as possible.
Request 1: Mechanisms
| Stakeholder 1 | Stakeholder 2 | Mechanism | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Retail end-user of Safe-based application | Modules developer | Fee taking | User pays a setup fee on the integration of their choice. This incentivizes developers to build on the Safe{Core} Protocol. If the fee is too high, it might disincentivize users though |
| Retail end-user of Safe-based application | Registry manager(s) | Staking | Auditors stake in order to get exposure to integration fee. This way, auditors are incentivized to provide high quality work since they have a monetary (staked SAFE tokens + potential rewards) and non-monetary (reputation) at stake |
Request 2: Examples of projects
| Mechanism | Project |
|---|---|
| Fee Taking | Arweave: Users pay a one-time fee to upload data |
5. Final Remarks
We hope to derive best practices from making the discovery process a community-owned effort. In order to organize this the best, we ask you to follow the outlined framework when providing feedback. The aim is to collect feedback by September 13th.
To make a submission, please post it in the designated submission thread. This will ensure there remains a clear overview of all submissions. Please do not use this thread for submissions. Instead, this thread can be used for general comments, questions or feedback on submissions.
A template can be found here and might be helpful. You can submit your input directly in the message, as a link to your completed template, or upload the completed template as a PDF. Please also provide your Ethereum address in your response so you can receive a POAP as a token of appreciation for your contribution.
Thank you very much in advance for all your efforts!
Thu, 12 Oct
18:30 CEST