[SEP #2] Community Initiative To Unpause Token Contract (Enabling Transferability)

Yes . I think we need a transferable token as it was with optimism, community members should be able to receive the reward and take advantage of it. Also, other users should have the right to be able to buy votes, this will help the development of our common cause with you! If the token is non-transferable, then the demand and interest in the project may subside, we need to be a full-fledged DAO. As Daniel said.


I’m for the proposal of enabling transferability


I think it should be fair to treat a proposal as a pure “temperature check” proposal by making clear in the proposal description that, no matter the outcome of the proposal, no change will be conducted. But might actually be an interesting idea to explore to have a designated SEP outlining/standardising these types of proposals.


I also don’t understand why we create vesting? If the token cannot be transferred, it has no price, why keep it for 4 years? I think that the community should listen to reality. If we want to be called DAO, we must have a TOKEN, and a token is something that cannot be taken away and can be transferred.

Otherwise, only 50% DAO is obtained. Moreover, we must motivate people, as well as attract new people interested in our development, without the Real Token it will be impossible.

People should receive rewards for participating in the project, be able to buy $Safe tokens to make decisions or suggest ideas. Few users have received 20k or more SAFE tokens in order to offer anything. And without this, it turns out that only a few people, including me, will become permanent initiators of ideas. But new people are always needed, otherwise it is a path to nowhere. And if new people can’t buy our token = won’t get the right to vote and can’t contribute to our community, then it turns out we can end up badly.

PS I also have more than 20 thousand safe tokens and before I make an idea about unlocking I want to hear your opinion on my comment. I see that many, like me, want to get a full-fledged DAO together we are POWER .


Dear , Users . I think we lost time every day chat in thread . I think we need give our voice in SNAPSHOT .

My dao voting - Snapshot


To be clear: I have no involvement in putting this on Snapshot, nor do I support it at this stage.

I mean, doing this now also is not in accordance with the initial governance setup which requires a proposal to be in Phase 1, while this proposal draft I’ve made is still in Phase 0.

I don’t know if I haven’t made myself clear enough, but I don’t intend to move this proposal to Phase 1 before SEP #1 has passed. In fact, I wanted to wait until the end of this month, so that the community has some additional time to align on the goals/mission of SafeDAO.

So if someone wants to have a proposal about enabling transferability right now, and not near the end of October, please write another proposal and post it directly in the SEP category to initiate Phase 1, and then post it after 6 days on Snapshot – because I won’t move this proposal before 3 conditions are met:

  • A decision about SEP #1 was made
    ** Status: Not put on Snapshot, but should be imminent **
  • $SAFE claims calmed down (daily average < 100)
    ** Status: Probably happens within this or next week **
  • A discussion around community alignment on goals/mission of SafeDAO has taken place (not necessarily by the means of a SEP)
    ** Status: / **

You look too suspicious…
Hope those who see this be vigilant, I don’t see any transaction in the wrap-safe contract, and the funds to deploy the contracts come from Aztec (untraceable), which looks like a scam.

1 Like

Its you right , but this DAO . I think people need voting , yoy may dont think for this , Its life) .

p.s :

I believe that people have the right to receive what is called a token in full. If we have some kind of token that is just lying around, then no one will waste their time on voting, ideas, and so on. Optimism gave people a token that many exchanged for money, but has it become worse? The community continues to grow.

Here I see that people are just playing for time, but we live in a very fast world. What is bad about the fact that the token will become free, gain fans, value?! You could reply to me but chose to ignore my message, I decided to take action 1 and offer my idea and vision for the DAO to the community. If we want to be called DAO, then we must enable everyone, without exception, to participate in the process. Without unlocking the token, this is impossible, we get a closed club. And this is no longer DAO.


It is a bit rushed to initiate this vote now…

But yes, this proposal has been discussed for a week and has different options set according to the opinions of different community members, so it is reasonable.

To be honest, I also hope that the token can be transferred as soon as possible, I see some DAOs/teams discussing how to use the $SAFE they got (including me and my friends, we jointly manage a SAFE), if these tokens are not transferable, then these discussions will be meaningless.


Yes . i delete my Voting for now , i create my thread few later . But i think work is done either quickly and efficiently, or long and poorly . We may wait more 1 year but for what ?

I just mean looks suspicious.
but it would be amazing if the contract you deployed could actually implement this functionality (Wrap safe to nft, and transfer ownership by transfer this NFT).
It would be more convincing if you could create a safe and demonstrate the process with your deployed contract.

Hi Bruce, I think at the earliest we need to wait until SEP#1 is passed before voting on enabling transferability, although I would also like token to be transferable, but I think it would be better to enable transferability with explicit participation agreement.

1 Like

Okey , i listen to members , wait sep #1

We will continue deliberating on this even in the next ten years if possible in the name of letting the community have some additional time to align on the on the goals/mission of SAFEDAO… The votooooorrrr!!! I suggest they should just enable immediate transferability and move on… All these trolling won’t matter in heaven. My 2 cents!!! We’re just shouldering an unnecessary issue IMO.


i don’t see why waiting until #1 proposal has passed to initiate the process of formalizing the 2nd.

i think the community is engaged and knowledgeable enough to handle concurrent votes.


They are just playing for time…nothing else!!! It’s obvious

1 Like

Yes , i think we lost time .Unlocking token dont give trouble DAO or users . Its normal process .
But few people here think we need lock token and wait , but what we wait ? If this trash token okey , trash dont need price , people , its T-R-A-S-H . If we normal token , we need give people transfer and price . We DAO or no . Not 50% Dao .


Have to disagree. I think it’s important that the SafeDAO community agrees on [SEP #1] SafeDAO Participation Agreement before conducting this vote.

As @Daniel has pointed out above, this is still in Phase 0, as it’s just a discussion. In order to move toward a vote, it would need to be moved to an SEP.

While I understand some SAFE holders have a preference to unpause the token contract, I do not see any reason to move to an SEP and execute a vote before SEP#1 is put up for a vote. This isn’t a time sensitive issue, and it’s important to come together as a community and reach consensus on the participation agreement.

I’ve shared my thoughts above, but I support @Daniel’s preference to keep this discussion open until the end of the month, so those who claim their SAFE and begin to review and contribute to the forum can weigh in and share their views on unpausing the token contract.


Why we not make have freedom token ?

I see no reason waiting till EOM… We’ve got 6k+ claims already and just a minute handy people in here… Well, let’s wait. Let’s say 20 or more people may join in here.