Listing on rarity.tools

[tartakovsky]

Not my idea, but someone needed to make the issue.

Pros:

• additional exposure so people can find lobsters where people are already looking for other projects
• somewhat useful established rarity tool
• potentially fixable to include unminted lobsters (though I personally prefer not to include them into rarity calculations and instead to see how rare what is already there)

Cons:

• 2 ETH price

My argument to justify the cost goes as follows: If listing on rarity.tools for 2 ETH will probably bring a 100 ETH more trading volume over a lifetime of LOBS because of additional exposure, then royalties bring 5.25 ETH to the DAO and the listing pays for itself.

[Fortuno89]

I second this.

While i dont really care about rarity of the seafood jpegs, buyers might (and usually do) deem the rarity tools listing desirable.

[jshendrik]

Supporting this, we need the right "infrastructure" around the project

[IvanGBi]

Pricy... can we just give them one of the NFTs from DAO? Instead of draining ETH treasury, expand the holder base. Because then even if they sell, it brings royalties to the DAO.

[jshendrik]

Pricy... can we just give them one of the NFTs from DAO? Instead of draining ETH treasury, expand the holder base. Because then even if they sell, it brings royalties to the DAO.

checks the floor price No, I rather pay 2 ETH

[tartakovsky]

Pricy... can we just give them one of the NFTs from DAO? Instead of draining ETH treasury, expand the holder base. Because then even if they sell, it brings royalties to the DAO.

I guess we can, but idk whether they want it. Also I consider 1 LOBS to be more valuable than 2 ETH from the treasury. Guess we can structure the vote as:

Shall we list on rarity.tools: 1) yes, for 2 ETH 2) yes, for 1 LOBS 3) no

Before that can be done we'd probably need to ask them whether they'll take 1 LOBS for listing instead of 2 ETH.

Also I'm sure they'll just sell it and take their 4 ETH instead of 2.

[Fortuno89]

1 lobs is worth much more than 2 eth. And also, they are more of a limited resource, while eth will (hopefully) keep streaming into de treasury. My personal opinion is to hold giving out LOBS as much as we can.

[IvanGBi]

Imho, I might be wrong here. But this is how project treasuries work: if you give a contractor an asset, they might appreciate you more + do more work / end up never selling / end up joining a community. That's why there is carry in funds, equity for founders, etc. If you just flat-pay, you end up NOT growing the community. And you restrict royalty circulation as well.

1 LOBS can end up being not sold + 2 ETH stays. Or ends up as sold then fine. ETH is there to spend then.

It's like using your shares to acquire talent. I understand this is trivial contract work, but I have had positive relationship with people when giving them assets instead of flat fees (even if it's more than they expect).

[tartakovsky]

Guess it's a valid argument. For the relationship to happen though someone would actually need to communicate to them and maintain that relationship. @IvanGBi wanna do the work? :)

[IvanGBi]

I am not working nor am I in control ser, somebody from the DAO can do this!

[alexflorence]

Guess it's a valid argument. For the relationship to happen though someone would actually need to communicate to them and maintain that relationship. @IvanGBi wanna do the work? :)

If no one else wants do I can do this after the DAO has clearly defined what we expect from them.

[NerosBerg]

There's no point in giving away LOBS (even if they do decide to accept it as payment) to rarity.tools who have hundreds of projects on their platform. They won't become part of the community due to receiving 1 NFT.

If we want them to promote us further after listing, we just got to pay their fees.

Being on rarity.tools is meant to show some collectors we mean business. They might otherwise not look into LOBS if we aren't listed.

[ethduke]

I support listing on rarity.tools and support the idea paying 1 LOBS instead of ETH. W/e, they can sold it, can hold it, this will help to more decentralize the DAO without depleting treasury.

[tartakovsky]

Okay, so the discussion seems to be more or less done.

Can someone who's not pleb create a proposal on Snapshot and share a link to it here?

Something like the following:

Shall we list on rarity.tools?

Pros:

- additional exposure so people can find lobsters where people are already looking for other projects
- somewhat useful established rarity tool
- potentially fixable to include unminted lobsters

Cons:
- 2 ETH price

Argument to justify the cost goes as follows:
- If listing on rarity.tools for 2 ETH will probably bring a 100 ETH more trading volume over a lifetime of LOBS because of additional exposure, then royalties bring 5.25 ETH to the DAO and the listing pays for itself.

Full discussion here: https://github.com/lobster-dao/overview/issues/19

Options:
- yes, for 2 ETH
- yes, for 1 LOBS (if they accept it, otherwise fallback to 2 ETH)
- no

[IvanGBi]

Seems good!

[ethisscam]

One major question for paying 1 LOBS is it adds extra communication work and they maybe refuse it. Since we can simply pay them ETH why would pay with LOBS?

Anyway, let's vote!

[NerosBerg]

Listing as closer to reveal as possible would be beneficial.

Deadline for voting should be not more than a day due to the above imo.

[tartakovsky]

Well, I'm waiting for someone to create the snapshot proposal, as i'm too pleb to do it myself

---

From: Mescalito @.> Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2021 1:43:18 PM To: lobster-dao/overview @.> Cc: Eugene Tartakovsky @.>; Author @.> Subject: Re: [lobster-dao/overview] Listing on rarity.tools (#19)

Listing as closer to reveal as possible would be beneficial.

Deadline for voting should be not more than a day due to the above imo.

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/lobster-dao/overview/issues/19#issuecomment-942265347, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAMMUG5MJFW2HE6GKBXYWZDUGV5GNANCNFSM5F2TLIDA. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOShttps://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Androidhttps://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.

[0xMoonwalker]

My 2 cents. I'll vote for giving 1 LOBS if they agree. Rarity.tools is an important part of the NFT community. Having them in LobsterDAO will give much more then just the simple calculation floor price - 2 ETH.

[nullbitx8]

Just going to put this out there for perspective, rarity.tools may be willing to put up lobsterdao rarity for free.

[kkkrackpot]

I'd offer them 1 common LOBS for permanent listing.

[Jecherio1]

I don't think that is worth paying for. And if there is to be a payment i should be in eth, because the nfts should go to good contributors.

[tartakovsky]

Okay, so the voting is live. It'll probably go down 2 ETH road judging from the current results.

Let's say I'm willing to do the work and talk to the Rarity guys.

I'd need to promise them to pay 2 ETH (unless someone here has a relationship with them and can persuade them to list for free).

I'm however not in control of the treasury.

@IvanGBi what is the process for securing an agreement from Multisig to actually send these 2 ETH when rarity agrees to list?

[kkkrackpot]

So what's happened with the deal? Will lobsters get listed?

[lukeorganic]

Any progress here?

[tartakovsky]

submitted the listing form to rarity. Next steps:

1) @IvanGBi needs to ping them through lobsterdao twitter 2) they should come back to us and give address to send them 2 ETH 3) we submit the tx, multisig signs 4) they receive and list

[kkkrackpot]

Done. Pls close.

[tartakovsky]

https://rarity.tools/lobsterdao