I think this is the real solution. Sending $CODE is just as easy as sending the NFT. Thereās a problem currently with people being hesitant to pass on the NFT benefits (ie $CODE) because they will likely have a monetary value.
It seems if you bought an NFT(which could have also gained monetary value) to gift to someone you can just as easily gift the governance token. Not doing that is really double dipping IMHO.
I donāt think we need to concern ourselves with attaching any value/benefits to the NFT other than those already established. Anyone who minted dozens of NFTs was clearly looking to speculate, which IMO is against what the whole point was anyways. Letās not forget it was also a free mint, regardless of what gas was at the time.
This is all a long-winded way to say, do the token drop as planned then allow the NFTs to become relics.
I agree on the whole ānot removing accessā or removing functionality - for the most part. Perhaps there is something that could be done in terms of including those of us who had MINTED the original NFTs with some kind of role or designation on the discord server that signifies us as being āOGsā or whatever, if the server winds up being opened up.
This could then be expanded upon, enabling members access to special rewards/programs/areas limited to members within this group only, similar to what @leooo.eth described in their post.
This wouldnāt be difficult to set up in terms of the technical aspects of it, both within discord and also regarding the snapshot. Iām not too familiar with why there have been so many people who purchased the NFTs post-snapshot, but they were most likely people who were making a speculative play without being fully informed beforehand, I guess?
Part of the appeal behind originally joining DD for me, was that it was restricted to those who minted one of the D4R NFTs if you wanted to gain access to the discord server. While it wasnāt by any means an ordeal to endure doing so, the fact that one had to manually mint directly interacting with the contract seems to have been a sufficient enough factor in ensuring a generally high level of skill/competency among members.
Maybe for those who had purchased the NFT on the secondary market, or those who minted more than 1 - there could be some form of a compromise by say, enabling additional membership slots/opportunities for people who are invited thru the existing members in return for staking/vesting the governance token that they received (equivalent to the amount allocated for someone who had 1 D4R NFT). That might be worth considering. As a final point/an aside, I should note that there are obvious benefits to expanding the growth of membership in the longer-term and allowing for new people to join ā plus the best way of growing will be through existing membersā recommendations and word-of-mouth. The whole ānetwork effectā thing in motion.
I think the NFT should still grant access right now as season 0 has been extended until the tokenomics are sorted out. We donāt want to silo ourselves and who knows, maybe new members will have ideas and insights that we didnāt previously have.
However, I do think that once $CODE is dropped, the role of the NFT is redundant as the membership access would be for those holding the tokens. Unless we approach it like other DAOs have by making the discord mostly public, but restricting certain channels behind the governance token holders. These channels can be public, but read only for non-members or they can be private channels that get unlocked once a member has 400 $CODE tokens in their wallet.
Personally, I do think the NFT has some value as those holding them currently are the genesis members of Developer DAO. Iām not sure how the idea of derivative NFTs sound such as the Bored Apes and the Mutant Serum that allow holders to use the Mutant Serum NFT to be airdropped a new ape. Maybe something like that can be played around with as a way to use the DD NFT to create derivative NFTs that can be used for other utilities such as rewards, sponsorships, membership access, etc.
TL;DR The NFT should still grant access to the discord right now that weāre still in season 0 and finalizing tokenomics, but once $CODE is released, it seems redundant to have the NFT do that as those wallets holding the NFT would be given 400 $CODE right off the bat for the basic membership access. However, the NFT should still retain some form of value even as a historical piece for Developer DAO and some form of utility unique to the NFT apart from the token.
I think the issue should be resolved on a case by case basis, being only 200 NFTS, we could check if these buyers are indeed devs (or devs in the making) or speculators. Checking if they are devs asking for some proof they were devs, could be a good way to go. How is up to discussion maybe having at least 1 book purchase receipt or a github account prior to the NFT buy, any other ideas? I think the proof should be non opinionated like real factual proof, account creations and buys or subscriptions and not knowledge or background check that can be forged, just someone that have shown some interest in becoming a dev. Yes there are non devs in the DAO and welcomed, but at that point in time, I think most of the ones that got into the DAO were DEVS.