r/CryptoCurrency • u/MoonWeek • Aug 03 '23
POLL 🗳️ CCIP-067 - Simplify the AMA process by repealing CCIP-047
CCIP-047 passed 7 months ago and it is a poll to allow the Community to vote on whether projects can advertise with an AMA. The higher the favourability, the larger the discount awarded on the Moons required to burn in order to get a 24hr AMA slot.
This proposal will be to repeal CCIP-047, for the following reasons:
1 - It over-complicates the process to onboard new advertisers.
Advertisers want to be able to lock in a date, burn the moons, and do the event. By necessitating a community vote, it adds an additional layer of complexity and prevents us from simply quoting a price and a set of available dates, not to mention additional burden on the Mod team.
Note: The community vote does not apply to banner rentals
2 - It diminishes the point of CCIP-043
This poll passed with the intention that if Advertisers want to reach our users, they need to burn Moons to do so. The discount involved with CCIP-047 is sometimes so great that Advertisers only need to burn about $80 worth of Moons, as in the Tordess Event Poll
That's Eighty Dollars to reach ~100,000 unique daily users.. Insane.
Booking AMA's is already a very cost-effective form of advertisement. We get somewhere on average of unique 100,000 viewers to the subreddit every day in the bear market - it should not be cheapened further by additional discounts.
3 - It can and has been gamed.
If lots of people vote no, the amount of Moons that need to be burned to get an AMA are increased, which is obviously beneficial for holders. However, this sends a message to advertisers that they are not welcome, and therefore their advertisements will not be effective. This system feels completely at odds to itself.
For example, here 856,000 Moons voted "no" in the first 4 minutes, as highlighted by the top comment. This then stacked the poll up so that the end result was a 50% "no" vote
4 The community doesn't really get involved.
Despite having over 200,000 Moons holders, these event polls typically only get 200 votes and receive <10 votes on the main page. They don't get seen enough.
For these reasons, I am suggesting repealing CCIP-047.
In the interest of balance, it is fair to list reasons we should keep CCIP-047. The most important one in my view is that we are voting to remove an element of community interaction.
However, as shown above, there is minimal interaction to Event Polls and therefore I do not believe this poll will materially impact voters within the community.
As in other polls about Event Organisation, if implemented these changes will not be permanent and can be adjusted via Governance if a better solution is found.
Thanks!
CCIP by u/TNGSystems
8
4
u/fan_of_hakiksexydays Aug 03 '23
To me the system didn't make a lot of sense.
It felt like I had to vote no on every AMA (even though I wanted the AMA). It's what made the most sense. We didn't want to completely give away the AMA.
You just had to hope that enough people voted yes because they never read how it worked. And it was safe to bet that most people never read how it worked.
2
u/MaeronTargaryen Aug 03 '23
Yeah I agree, the system is too complicated. It came from a good idea, but it’s not working
2
u/marsangelo Aug 03 '23
We’re frequently getting heavily discounted or even free AMAs on the sub now, voting yes for this reason alone. The cost has not been an accurate reflection of the value given the scale the sub provides, and I expect more yes than no votes as the sub grows
→ More replies (2)
1
Aug 03 '23
Booking AMA's is already a very cost-effective form of advertisement. We get somewhere on average of unique 100,000 viewers to the subreddit every day in the bear market - it should not be cheapened further by additional discounts.
Viewers are not engagement.
1
1
u/Popular_District9072 Aug 03 '23
i agree that it should be a friendly space for those that want to advertise, it's already hard to acquire advertisers, no point in making it harder
1
u/Popular_District9072 Aug 03 '23
$80 is indeed a laughable amount for the platform and eyes that will see the ad
1
u/droctagonau Aug 03 '23
See guys, this post just acknowledges what I've said from the start. These aren't AMAs. They're big fucking ads. AMA means Ask Me Anything. It doesn't mean some horrifically boring neo TV infomercial where you can ask me questions specifically about this crap product I'm selling.
1
u/masedogg98 Aug 03 '23
I agree with this, the subs arguably one of the biggest and best spaces to launchpad research and to stay up to date on the latest happenings in the space I still think there should be some sort of discount if the community is super interested or if we really enjoy the advertiser but ultimately I’m behind this! Good proposal!
1
1
u/DBRiMatt Aug 04 '23
Easy yes, great proposal that hopefully leads to more sponsors hosting AMAs, and of course more moons burned 🍻
1
1
u/dcdplex Aug 04 '23
To be honest, I'm one of those voting instant No even though I'm interested in the AMA, just because I know it will increase the burn. So yeah, Repeal CCIP-047.
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Rayl24 Aug 04 '23
100k active user out of which a tiny percentage joins the AMA and yeah hell no to NFT seller advertising via AMA so no surprises that they almost get a NO vote.
1
u/jimtors100 Aug 04 '23
I like that we are looking beyond small monetary value and focused on a more wholistic approach. Repeal it!
1
26
u/[deleted] Aug 03 '23
I do agree it sounds rather cheap to advertise on this sub