Optimism’s newly launched governance token, OP, it has tumbled 40% since its peak of $2.10, prompting community members to debate those who ditched their tokens from future releases.
Cointelegraph reported Tuesday Ethereum’s Layer 2 scaling solution was overwhelmed by demand for the initial release of the OP governance token as 5% of the token supply was distributed to around 250,000 eligible users.
According to CoinGecko, The token opened at around $1.43 before rallying to $2.10, but as more users took advantage of the free launch throughout the day, the OP dropped as low as $1.09 before bouncing back to $1.18 $ rose at the time of writing, which is a 43% drop.
Yesterday was an absolute whirlwind. It wasn’t without its hiccups, but too much excitement was born OP. ‿
We’ll have an extensive retro next week on Drop Day. In the meantime, we’d like to share some stats from the launch.
Now that more than 50% of Drop 1 is claimed, let’s dive in! pic.twitter.com/oGnxB47E3f
— Optimism (✨_✨) (@optimismPBC) June 1, 2022
Yesterday was a real whirlwind. It wasn’t without its setbacks, but with much excitement, the OP was born. ‿ Next week we will publish a detailed report on Launch Day. In the meantime, we’d like to share some stats from launch. Since >50% of Release 1 is already claimed, let’s get started! pic.twitter.com/oGnxB47E3f
After the sharp drop in the OP price, a member of the governance community named OxJohn submitted a proposal to the Optimism Governance forum to exclude addresses that dumped 100% of their tokens.. The post attracted considerable attention from the community with 11,200 views, 305 replies and 595 likes.
OxJohn highlighted several addresses that received at least 32,000 OP tokens and quickly launched them, arguing that their actions are “backward productive” for the community and diluting the governance process..
The OP Hodler suggested that these accounts should be banned from the OP’s next round of releases and that there should be “a public list of accounts engaging in this behavior.”. He believes this would only spread the burden of governance among those who plan to participate actively.
“Why would the Optimism Collective continue to reward these types of mercenary performers who dump their tokens on the fly? Why would a future version reward these addresses?
The proposal was submitted for ideas and comments only and is a long way from the voting stage. The response from the governance community has been mixed so far. Some users fully support the idea, others totally oppose it, and still others call for a more nuanced position..
The user Mohammedt75 said: “Very valid points. Incentivize people who care about long-term and let those who don’t care about the ecosystem pack up and go.”.
Mgomes explained that “one of the goals of the launch is to encourage people to use the chain. Even if they’re thinking of leaving her, it’s okay because they used optimismand if they liked the chain, they will continue to use it.”
Member JustinMarx also highlighted an interesting counterpoint, stating that those who discarded their tokens should not be penalized as “you never know the personal circumstances of someone who discarded their tokens”.
The proposal to punish $OP Airdrop dumpers by excluding them from future airdrops is paraswap shit lol. Yes, punish the only people who used your chain. Make sure they go straight to your competitor Arbitrum and never come back.
— NoSleepJon (@nosleepjon) June 1, 2022
The suggestion to punish those who have sold their OP tokens by banning them from future releases is bullshit. Yes, punish the only people who used your chain. Make sure they go straight to your Arbitrum competitor and never come back.
One of the most well-known crypto Twitter users was Cobie, the co-host of the cryptocurrency podcast Only up, which has nearly 700,000 followers. He responded to the suggestion in his typical satirical/mocking manner.
Cobie submitted a detailed counter-proposal entitled “Extended ineligibility for future airdrops” in the forum. which was temporarily removed for being flagged as “inappropriate” but has since been restored.
In her, said that “my lack of support for this proposal is not due to disagreement with the opinion. Rather, it is because this proposal does not go far enough.”.
“I propose that we, the Optimism Collective, cancel future releases from anyone who has sold tokens in the last 6 months. These people have an undesirable behavioral pattern, we can view them as “potential future sellers.”
To discourage potential future sellers, Cobie suggested issuing them a promissory note and also considering “physical violence” against them..
The post that *legitimately suggests banning sellers* is allowed on the Optimism forums.
But a parody of this post is objectionable, offensive and violates the Community Guidelines and will be deleted.
Thanks for the reminder. pic.twitter.com/Ru0oFnZufw
—Cobie (@cobie) June 1, 2022
Post legitimately suggesting ban seller is allowed on Optimism forum. But a parody of this post is objectionable, offensive, and against the Community Guidelines and will be removed. Thanks for the reminder. pic.twitter.com/Ru0oFnZufw
Nevertheless, After being asked to be more serious about the proposal, Cobie highlighted several reasons why he thinks it’s a bad idea.
He pointed out points like that the initial price of OP is irrelevant, that the sellers have different reasons for having sold their tokens, the possibility of selling and participating in the governance that the token as part of the cost of customer acquisition is used of optimism and the ease of creating a new address to avoid restrictions.
“The only ones who care are price speculators, traders and short-term investors. Governance certainly works the same whether the price is $1.50 or $2. Sure, major price changes could make Optimism’s governance hacks cheaper, but that’s not mentioned once in the original proposal.”
“And it’s not really a problem given the size of the launch or the short-term nature of the selling pressure from ‘quick sellers,'” he added..
I was tricked into making a serious post as the OP Labs staff were annoyed with my tone. https://t.co/wikRr8IB8Y pic.twitter.com/Z0fxtOJ8kx
—Cobie (@cobie) June 1, 2022
I was tricked into posting a serious post as the OP Labs staff were annoyed by my sarcastic tone. https://t.co/wikRr8IB8Y pic.twitter.com/Z0fxtOJ8kx
Clarification: The information and/or opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views or editorial line of Cointelegraph. The information contained herein should not be construed as financial advice or investment recommendation. All investment and trading movements involve risk and it is the responsibility of each person to conduct their proper research before making any investment decision.