Skip to main content

Discord Chats Compared to Proposal

Here is a summary of the key ideas from the Discord chats and how they compare to the current proposal:

Key Ideas from Discord Chats:

  1. Create an official ai16z launchpad for Eliza-based projects. This would be the key mechanism to implement flywheel tokenomics that accrue value to the $ai16z token. Ideas include taking a fee on launches, requiring $ai16z holdings for allocations, making $ai16z the purchase token for agent offerings, providing liquidity via $ai16z pairs, and supporting launched projects.

  2. Have the DAO curate/endorse quality projects launching on the platform to maintain standards and reputation. A rotating board could review applications.

  3. Implement staking of $ai16z to get benefits like early access and fee share. This drives demand and reduces circulating supply.

  4. Use launch fees and LP profits to buyback and reinvest in Eliza development vs burning. This supports the ecosystem.

  5. Provide liquidity mining incentives and locking to stabilize LP and incentivize long-term providing.

  6. Long-term, position ai16z as an L1 for AI to cement its status and value. Development should be open-source with node incentives.

  7. Be wary of selling DAO treasury tokens as it looks bad. Focus resources on widening Eliza's moat as the top framework.

  8. More analysis is needed before committing to any complex tokenomic changes. Simplicity and sustainability should be priorities.

How this Compares to the Proposal:

The current proposal captures most of the key ideas from the Discord discussions, particularly around the phased approach moving from an official launchpad (Phase 1) to a full Eliza ecosystem with products that feed value to $ai16z (Phase 2) and eventually an ai16z L1 (Phase 3).

Some additional ideas worth considering from the discussions:

  • Having the DAO/partners curate which projects get "official" endorsement on the launchpad to maintain quality

  • Specifics around liquidity mining incentives to stabilize LP and retain stakeholders

  • Using buybacks to reinvest in Eliza development vs just burning

  • More emphasis on resourcefulness to make Eliza the preeminent platform as the core value driver

  • Reminders to keep initial iterations simple and sustainably balance incentives across stakeholders

But overall, the proposal does a thorough job translating the Discord brainstorming into a coherent, staged roadmap. The main opportunity is adding more tactical details in some areas while retaining flexibility to adjust based on initial results. Given the fast pace of AI development, speed balanced with stability is key.

My recommendation would be to start executing Phase 1 quickly to establish a flywheel and leadership position, while continuously getting community feedback and analyzing results to optimize future phases. The strong fundamentals of Eliza combined with intelligent economic design can accelerate ai16z's mission significantly.

Proposal Answers to Top FAQ​

Overview

The goal is to build a self-sustaining economic system that aligns the interests of individual projects with the overall growth of the ai16z ecosystem by making it easier for projects to launch, grow, and maintain liquidity.

When a new AI project launches its token on the platform, users can trade that token for SOL, wherein the LP generates a small fee, collected by the platform. The Launchpad splits this fee in two:

  1. Half of the fee is used to buy back $ai16z tokens from the market
  2. The other half of the fee is paired with the newly bought $ai16z tokens to create a special pool of funds that provides extra liquidity for the new project's token

This special pool brings more stability to both tokens and encourages growth for $ai16z and the new token. The Launchpad also has a unique way of handling the fees collected from the special pool. The $ai16z portion goes to the DAO treasury, project tokens are rebalanced back to the main trading pool to keep liquidity high.

As mentioned, I've analyzed the past 4 days of discussions and aim to address the most burning questions and topics ya'll had. Based on the details in the tokenomics proposal, here are some initial answers and high level overview:

Phase 1: Launchpad (Q1 2025)

This was an acquisition play with ready-for-market tech and a solid technical team. It aims to serve as the schelling point for innovation on the Eliza framework, including agent-to-agent interactions (swarms), multi-chain integrations, and other frontier advancements enabled by Eliza's plugin architecture.

  • Value capture mechanisms include launch fees, $ai16z token staking for access, and liquidity pool pairings with $ai16z.
  • A curation process will involve ai16z partners vetting and endorsing high-quality projects. Systemizing / scaling the "Shaw" social signalling model.
  • Post launch, code will be progressively open-sourced so the community can collaborate on it.

Phase 2: Ecosystem Growth / Incentive Alignment

The goal of this ecosystem is to have multiple products add value to each other and inextricably tie value to the $ai16z token. The analogy here would be how $ETH or $SOL underpins most core decentralized infra built on top of it (e.g. used as collateral, base trading pairs etc). The argument here is if ai16Z is building decentralised AGI then its token should be the medium that aligns its actors to get there.

  • Projects / Devs will be incentivized through ecosystem funds, potential investment from the autonomous investor, and fee sharing from the launchpad.
  • Buyback and burn mechanics using launchpad fees are being explored as a value accrual strategy.

Treasury Strategy

The treasury will be diversified across major L1 tokens, stablecoins, and select project tokens. It will provide liquidity support and incentives for $ai16z pairs while maintaining a long-term approach to sustain projects through market fluctuations without reactive selling.

Key Considerations

  • Aiming to align incentives, attract developers, and foster long-term adoption within the ai16z / Eliza ecosystem.
  • Technical specifics like fee structures and liquidity ratios are being finalized to balance simplicity, sustainability, and adaptability.
  • The launchpad seeks to compliment, not compete with, community efforts, offering unique benefits and open source components while remaining optional for projects.
  • Flexibility and iterative updates based on market conditions and community feedback will guide ongoing development.