Issuance Topic 1: Should the Original NFT (Devs for Revolution) give access to the Discord server after we switch to the Governance Token?

We are looking to get community feedback on a few topics. Please vote on the poll below and leave your comments! These are to serve as a community check - this is not an official governance proposal!

If you held the NFT at the snapshot when the last NFT was minted you will be receiving Governance Tokens that allow you to keep your access in the Discord server.

Over 200 people have purchased our NFT after the snapshot on secondary markets. These people are not going to receive any governance tokens and currently also are not going to get access to our Discord. Most of these people heard about the DAO from friends or social media and quickly bought the token before checking the OpenSea description or our messaging. How should we proceed?

  • Continue to disallow discord access for the NFT and switch to the Governance token only.
  • Allow the NFT to give Discord access while keeping the snapshot for governance token issuance.
  • Solve the issue another way (comment below).

0 voters

Issuance topics w/ polls!
Issuance Topic 1: Should the Original NFT (Devs for Revolution) continue to give access to the Discord server?

Issuance Topic 2: How should we handle the small edge case of users who have addresses that have been compromised?

Issuance Topic 3: Should we work to enable delegation at token issuance?


Seems like people who bought on the secondary market want to get in but missed out. Even if they are speculators, they are speculating on the value proposition of the DAO and should be rewarded as such (imo). If they are late comers they will participate in governance and their voice should be heard, if they are speculators they won’t vote anyway.


I’m sure most of us are going to be unhappy about this if we are going to lose access to the Discord server even though we already minted the Developer DAO NFT. Why would it even be considered to not allow access to the Discord Server?


@no-ze I had to re-read this section too, I think it means there were 200 people that bought their NFTs after the snapshot meaning they never had access to Discord?

I’m a recent member, but minted my NFT before the snapshot – I assume this doesn’t mean we’d lose access under the new Governance token. We’d still have access plus be part of the new Governance $CODE tokens.

@willblackburn can you confirm? This part may need some more clarification.


That’s correct! Clarifying now - thanks!


Thank you. So what you’re saying is that for those who’ve minted during the first 8000 NFT will also be part of the new Governance tokens correct? How do I know if I’m in the snapshot?

I think the NFT should still give access. Removing utility doesn’t make sense to me. Retaining access powers while keeping the snapshot for governance token issuance seems like the simplest solution.

Here’s my take on what the timeline of NFT powers would look like.


Revoking access doesn’t make sense to me. IMHO, we should keep the threshold lower, not higher. If people is later, and willing to pay the price of entry, either NFT or token, they will be welcome and granted access.


I didn’t vote on the above poll, cause the 3 options are complicated

IMO, we shouldn’t allow access till the governance token is ready and we start to give memberships as we haven’t decided yet which going to be public areas in the Discord

The 200 should be allowed access without token airdrop

1 Like

burn the NFT for CODE? Would solve the snapshot issue, keeps the process simple and increases the value of the genesis NFTs.


I don’t think we need to resolve a problem created by ingenuity and ignorance. Nothing against them, we didn’t make any error, so I think we don’t need to “compensate” people for their mistake.

I think we can remove the Discord access with the genesis NFT only if we keep in mind that we need to create additional value for owning the NFT.

For example:

  • access to specific promotions
  • access to beta release of specific products
  • better multiplier on token airdrops
    … and many more.

Moreover, doing that, gives a sort of compensation / reward (long term) for who as bought the NFT on the market.

I think NFT are super valuable and better tech than simple tokens, and we can create better use cases around them.

1 Like

Assuming that we can restrict a role to those that hold an ERC20 token (governance token) in sufficient quantity, I think that we can improve the NFTs-access-discord plan further:

  • Have portions of the discord gated by Governance Token. In my head this means that the NFT gets you access to the social and technical aspects of D_D Discord.
  • Have Governance-only channels for those that are Governance Token holders (of sufficient quantity that they are able to vote).

I see this as extending the social/community size of D_D (and keeping the base utility of the D_D NFT) while making it clear that there is benefit to holding the ERC20.


What about people who have been gifted their NFT? I bought two for other people assuming that it would give them access to both the discord and any governance token. It would be extremely unfortunate to disallow access to this group.


There are two different conversations being merged into one with this post, no?

  1. Are we limiting access to the Discord entirely to token holders, or only specific channels?
  2. How will this token access work - holding a participating share of $CODE, or holding the NFT?

Re: 1
I think it is too exclusionary to limit access to the entire Discord to only token holders. I think the Bankless DAO actually has a good model for this.

  • Anyone can join and look around public channels
  • People who can’t afford the membership can get a free 1 week pass, and can only renew that pass when a Level 2 member (a token holder with appointed leadership responsibilities) advocates for them. This guest pass can access most of the token-gated channels.

Re: 2
Limiting Discord access to NFT’s does not make sense to me, I thought the whole point of moving to fungible token membership was because the artificial scarcity of NFTs is an unnecessary barrier to entry.

If we want to increase the value of the NFTs, this is the wrong way to do it. Maybe if we do community participation events including airdrops or something, then limiting that to NFTs might make sense. Limiting Discord access seems illogical to me.


Great feedback so far, thanks to everyone for chiming in and special thanks to @willblackburn for putting together this poll to gauge feedback from the community.

I originally was thinking we should move Discord token gating from the NFT to the new governance token and issue governance tokens to all minters of the NFT. The reasoning behind this was to reward and continue allowing access to the original supporters of the DAO while hopefully not giving a reward to people who had speculated on the NFT by minting dozens of them, as the value of the NFT would obviously go up in value if it allowed official DAO membership and there were no longer any available to ming.

In hindsight, and with the feedback I’m seeing here, it seems the best way to go is to continue enabling Discord / DAO access with both the NFT as well as the governance tokens while limiting governance to holders of the governance token.

A huge goal of the DAO is to make it more accessible to more people, and I think that opening it up for both will also be the more accessible option.

The only consideration is that this will probably bring more people in and therefore give more importance to scaling the server, we need to be able to handle the influx of people which will mean we need to be sure that we have a really solid onboarding flow.

Point - if we decide to go this route, I think we should go ahead and make the decision soon and announce it asap, would love to start officially enabling access again for new members!!


I’m in a similar position as @BrandonLeB, I bought some extra NFTs because I want to gift them to people who missed out because of gas prices. I hope they keep giving access to the Discord!


+1000000 for the wonderful illustration


Discontinue any utility value of the NFT. In my mind it shouldn’t be anything more than a souvenir, and it was a great tool for advertising the existence of the DAO and its goals. I believe that attaching exclusive value to the NFT is not in the equitable spirit that I understand the DAO to embody.

Issue governence tokens to everyone before the snapshot. Maybe some folks got an NFT before that, I don’t know. Then let them have their luck. A lot of alternative suggestions are revolving around the idea of getting in first should be highly rewarded, which is also luck.

Any cases such as with @BrandonLeB and @karmacoma, I’m sure we can work that out on a human level. I also wanted to invite some friends to the DAO, but couldn’t since it was closed to NFT holders. I probably would have tried to do the same as Brandon and Karma, but I’m not that savey!

And as @dabit3 says, let’s get access open mindfully. Maybe it would be an idea to consider making that onboarding process a slowly paced/time-based affair not unsimilar to what @eddie said about BanklessDAO (and their exploding server!). Something like: open a new channel per week to new folks and let them walk through a few ‘challenges’ every week to be able to progress and self-assess their own involvement/commitment. The inticement of scarcity hehe. This would also prevent a lot of that ‘overwhelmed’ effect when jumping into a new server. Or maybe I’m just too old hahaha

Just my two wei!


I did the same thing. I am just going to send the $CODE I receive for the gifted NFT to the person I gifted it to.

1 Like

I wonder if the governance token could provide access in the near term, to allow those with longer term commitment to solidify the community a bit more. And at some point in the future, when we want to expand the community, allow in others who hold the NFT to have access.