The Givers - The Giveth Ecosystem PFP Collection

[santigs]

Proposal Description

There are many gaming, engaging and economic mechanics which can be introduced with a NFT/PFP collection linked to Giveth. The idea is to create a collection called The Givers and add initial utility to the NFTs as the owners purchase them. After a period of time, once the collection is introduced and spread in the community, additional new creative dynamics can be introduced to keep the community engaged adding project NFTs like those described in previous posts in the forum. We are describing this proposal only as an introductory way to incorporate NFTs into the ecosystem from a gaming perspective. Many other rules and utilities can be incorporated after a collection is launched.

Proposal Rationale

Creating a circular sustainable economy is key to any crypto ecosystem such as Giveth. The DeFi farms, staking benefits, Givstream, and the Giv backs are great ways to avoid quick token dumps and incentivize economy participation but they are all based on economic mechanics. Implementing gamification through the introduction of an NFT collection will be an original and creative way to implement engaging mechanics which will bring revenue inflows and will create the baseline if later the DAO decides to introduce potential play-to-earn gaming elements.

We expect 6 weeks for all art generation and minting code, for front-end design aligned with the Giveth site as well as NFT utility we will need giveth support.

Benefits of the proposal

• The Givers NFT collection will introduce a new creative way to engage with the audience
• Will increase the sense of belonging to the DAO.
• Will generate revenues that will be able to be distributed between the projects, donors, and the treasury.
• Will introduce the first gamification elements which can later be complemented with other ones as well as gamification initiatives.

Possible Narrative

An art proposal could represent The Givers as donors to the Giveth projects. They are community members who feel identified with the Giveth project as they have contributed in the past or will contribute through the NFT acquisition. We plan on launching a collection of unique NFTs in the Gnosis chain. Most NFT collections are only male genre-based so we think it would be nice to offer a male/female choice at minting and then a random composition of different elements will end up creating the final NFT image. Here is an example of two sketches offering different “gifs” as a contribution to Giveconomy.

We can introduce rarity to the collection, configuring some traits to have less probability to be randomly selected when the collection image algorithm creates all the collection. We can also link the amount of Givs or Givstream to the rarity of the NFT.

We understand collection theme and narrative have to be discussed to reach the highest consensus, so take this as an example of how everything would be developed.

NFT Utility

Below are utility ideas to start with and engage in the broader conversation with the community. The final technical implementation will be decided after we hear all input from the community and assess the feasibility of implementation.

Purchasing one of the Givers will provide you with two basic first sale utilities:

• A one-time amount of initial Givs the owner will only be able to donate to existing verified projects.

• A one-time amount of Givs or a weekly stream of Givs depending on the rarity of your Giver NFT.

• We suggest having a maximum of 10.000 unique NFTs representing The Givers

• We suggest the collection will be sold in the Gnosis Blockchain and priced in xDai.

• Launching costs will be covered by a garden proposal. See the budget below.

• Funnyverse team will lead the project and will provide the art and the code to generate the unique NFT png files with the corresponding metadata JSON files. Funnyverse has Smart contract knowledge for bulk minting (minting all NFTs and offering them so the users can see them and choose which one they want to purchase). Support from Giveth will be needed if we intend to mint on demand (showing a common generic image when users purchase and seeing the result after the mint)

• In the event we decide to mint on demand, we propose to create a minting page on the Giveth website. Support will be needed from the Giveth team to create the webpage and integrate its functionality with the smart contract. Support from Giveth will also be needed to add the NFT utility described in the previous section.

• After minted, we suggest NFTs to be added to the Emporio NFT market in the Gnosis chain. In case of linking a GivStream to the NFT, this utility will be transferred with NFT.

Proposed Budget

• We request a budget of 15.000 xDai to cover the following:

• Art design. We will discuss general art themes with the community and once that is closed different traits will be generated for different parts of the design (ie, mouth, eyes, clothes, background, head, etc) with their rarities in the event we decide to give different weight to some of the traits. The combination of all traits will be enough to generate the total number of unique units we finally decide for the whole collection.

• NFT file generation. Code will be created to randomly select a variation of every single trait to generate every single final art png file as well as the JSON file representing the metadata using the Opensea standard so all markets using that same standard can recognize the NFTs.

• Data upload. All data will be uploaded to IPFS

• NFT smart contracts. Open Source contracts will be modified and deployed to mint the NFTs. We will choose if we want a pre-mint collection or a mint on-demand one.

• Project management. Funnyverse can lead or be part of the team leading the project if Giveth decides to do so.

• All revenues generated from the sale as well as IP rights will be transferred to Giveth DAO

• Funnyverse commits to provide liquidity 3000 xDai in one of the Giveth pools on the Gnosis chain

Ethereum address

Funnyverse Ethereum address

0xc9D1B08bdD82B0a0E59Bd8675CF4Ef880E5e11db

Team

Members

• Funnyverse is a team of two.

  • Alex is the artist, with long experience in comic and caricature art. He was also the art creator of TEC Hatch NFT.
  • Santi has several years of project management experience and several months of DAO experience latelly as a steward in TEC. They both launched a previous collection called The Grim Folks in the WAX blockchain

• Team Role Definitions.

  • All art will be created by Alex
  • Santi will lead coordinating all work from the art and development team. He will be dealing with the code to generate the NFT files out of the different art layers (png and JSON) for the entire collection, and also in NFT smart contract minting and front-end together with Giv Devs.

Conclusion

We look forward to all your proposal comments. The Funniverse team, as an NFT lover, already led the TEC hatch NFT proposal together with some members of the community.

We believe projects need to be fun, and an NFT collection can be the first element to open the door to future NFT elements to complement this great project which could be the seed to a future play-to-earn game implementation to bring newer members and donors to the DAO.

Special thanks to @Markop for his help and insights on the proposal and @Mitch on his revision

[markop]

Thanks for posting this @santigs

I’m in favour of this proposal (obviously), as I proposed long ago that Giveth should have an NFT gallery on Opensea or elsewhere, and make use of NFT utilities.

There have been more talks and ideas on how we can use NFT’s, this one by @WhyldWanderer and this one by @paxthemax

I would love to have more discussion about this and possibly create an overall NFT strategy for Giveth, making this proposal potentially the first one to execute.

Looking forward hearing what others say.

[Danibelle]

All for having Giveth NFT’s and have been wondering who will deliver the first solution with utility that addresses some of the challenges Giveth is working on right now!

I see potential with this for the Account Level proposal, to gamify the upleveling of a users profile… Love it

[santigs]

That is the idea behind the proposal.
Launch the collection and get some Xdai income to the treasury on top of launch initial NFT utility to fund some projects and givstream/givbacks to NFT owners. From there, there are plenty of new utility we can think of.

[markop]

Some notes on this proposal from the governance call:

1. Need. someone to PM

2. Prepare a broader overview of possible NFT roadmap for Giveth, incorporating all and new NFT ideas that were discussed on the Forum

3. Create a preliminary roadmap

4. Start with this proposal

5. Change the narrative

[santigs]

I agree is key to have a PM lead this proposal and create the preliminary roadmap as this should be the spark to add future potential initiatives with NFTs. Having in mind previous discussed ideas to include those feasible should be considered in the roadmap.
As I suggested, discussing the narrative before launch is key as a way to have everyone aligned. Art can adapt afterward.

[mitch]

This seems like a great idea, I think there have been many proposals or idea generation posts regarding NFTs and gamifying Giveth a bit more. However I want to clarify - do you have developers who would build this? Do you have a project manager to make this proposal happen? Isn’t that you @santigs from what I read in the proposal?

I don’t think there is much bandwidth from Giveth, especially any developer bandwidth with RegenFarms having opened and GIVpower and an Angel Vault on the horizon to take on part or most of this proposal. I wouldn’t feel confident putting my weight behind this proposal without a more fleshed out team that can take this proposal/idea to the finish line.

Also adding to @markop comments this doesn’t feel like a complete proposal. There’s some pretty loose gamification strategies and I think it could do better. We had some great ideas already in the forum that marko mentioned about previous ideas for NFT incorporation.

I would get behind a bigger funding proposal for this if it were a bit more fleshed out and there was a stronger team behind it.

[santigs]

Thank you for your feedback @mitch.

As I mentioned in the proposal, we can handle the art components, image generation, smart contract minting, and basic minting dApp. We can also coordinate the project by taking the PM role. We would need Giveth to integrate the basic utility described in the proposal and minting dApp design and front-end help following Giveth graphic line.

I agree there is plenty of gamification which can be introduced following some of the previously discussed ideas but the proposal goal is to get the ball rolling by introducing an initial collection adding utility that would bring income to projects and the treasure, analyze the community response and then decide how to move beyond this initial step.

[sem]

I love Alex’s artwork, and he and Santi do a great team. I think they are going to provide a very high quality PFP that everybody will love to show in their profiles and other places.

The two parts that the proposal is floppy IMO are the narrative and the tokenomics.

In regards of narrative, the question the proposal should reply are:

• Why should I love my Giver?
• What Givers stand for?

Whereas gender inclusivity is something to stand for, it can’t be the only motive to have a Giver. Having a Giver must mean something, such as being a true supporter of the projects within Giveth (meaing), having more than X amount of GIV (ownership), or having a lot of GIVpower (social influence). Octalysis framework can be useful to determine which use to give to new elements such as PFPs.

In regards of tokenomics, we can think on what is important to Giveth, and design the NFT in a way that we obtain what Giveth needs as an outcome. I see many positive things for Giveth and how they could be accomplished with the minting of NFTs:

• Refilling the Common Pool with GIV.
  • If we mint the NFT in exchange for sending GIV to the common pool, the two positive outcomes:
    • GIV may be potentially bought, creating a buy pressure on GIV, and increasing its price.
    • The common pool has more resources, so more things can be done using the GIVgarden.
  • There is one drawback, obtaining givers would mean give away your GIV governance power.
• Locking GIV for a long time.
  • If we mint the NFT in exchange for locking GIV within the NFT for a long period of time, we can avoid the sell pressure, because selling/unlocking your GIV would mean to “destroy” your Giver.
  • GIVbacks could be automatically locked within Givers.

I’m currently working on the GIVpower contracts, and it would not be a bad idea to use non-transferable NFTs to represent token locks that hold GIVpower (second positive outcome above). If we altogether figure out a better narrative, and the GIVpower team like the idea (@karmaticacid and @markop may be the most relevant for telling), I can work on a proposal to include NFTs on GIVpower. Otherwise, Givers could be used for something else.

If we go this way, Funnyverse team would only have provide the images and their metadata (traits, rarity score…).

I would suggest to divide the proposal in different parts, so the community can see the outcomes before committing to pay for the full price. The community also has to access which is the value that the NFTs will provide in relation of their cost, and it will depend mostly on the tokenomics used.

[karmaticacid]

Thanks Santi for putting together the proposal! I love the concept of having a Giver NFT that people could identify with, wear proudly as their profile pic. I love Alex’s art too.

I think the art production & minting sounds well taken care of, the part that I really think needs to be hashed out more is the ultility.

From the post:

@santigs

Purchasing one of the Givers will provide you with two basic first sale utilities:

• A one-time amount of initial Givs the owner will only be able to donate to existing verified projects.
• A one-time amount of Givs or a weekly stream of Givs depending on the rarity of your Giver NFT.

I don’t like the idea of giving GIV as an incentive with constraints, i.e. can only donate to verified projects. TBH, I don’t really see a ton of value in us using GIV to incentivize minting an Giver NFT.

I think we should instead consider other utility… ones that create demand for GIV. In @paxthemax 's post, he said something like:

• NFTs can be minted in a stable coin, OR
• NFTs can be minted at a discount if using GIV

@sem

Refilling the Common Pool with GIV.

• If we mint the NFT in exchange for sending GIV to the common pool, the two positive outcomes:
  • GIV may be potentially bought, creating a buy pressure on GIV, and increasing its price.
  • The common pool has more resources, so more things can be done using the GIVgarden.

@sem’s idea of sending GIV to the common pool to mint NFTs is also interesting, because it refills the pool & creates demand for GIV… although I’m not sure I’m fully onboard with this because tbh we have a lot of GIV in the common pool… we’re not really in need of a top up any time soon (especially w the stream).

@sem

Locking GIV for a long time.

• If we mint the NFT in exchange for locking GIV within the NFT for a long period of time, we can avoid the sell pressure, because selling/unlocking your GIV would mean to “destroy” your Giver.
• GIVbacks could be automatically locked within Givers.

@sem I’m interested in this idea, but don’t fully understand it. How would that work? After “a long period of time”, does the minter get their GIV back without selling the NFT?

@sem

I’m currently working on the GIVpower contracts , and it would not be a bad idea to use non-transferable NFTs to represent token locks that hold GIVpower (second positive outcome above).

I think this adds unnecessary complexity to GIVpower, and we should keep the two ideas separate. GIVpower is well on its way at this point. Right now, users earn a yield for locking tokens… Also they can stake & lock different amounts of tokens at different times for different lockups. This could be a lot of NFTs… also destroying them to unlock GIV in small batches… ugh it just gets confusing. I don’t think it’s a good idea to go down this rabbit hole.

I agree with the idea of separating this proposal in two perhaps: one to cover the cost setting up artwork and minting… and a second to determine how to actually use these NFTs in a way that benefits Giveth & the GIVeconomy

[sem]

I’m interested in this idea, but don’t fully understand it. How would that work? After “a long period of time”, does the minter get their GIV back without selling the NFT?

I was thinking more on an NFT made of GIV, the same way you can have a ring made of gold and diamond. In order to retrieve the GIV you should destroy the NFT, the same way you should destroy the ring to get the diamond. It could be done using Charged Particles.

We could combine different metrics, for example rarity and giving EXP:

• The probability of obtaining a rare GIVer (unpredictability and scarcity in octalysis) increases the more GIV you lock when you mint it and the minimum amount of time you won’t be able to unmade your GIVer.
• Every time you donate GIV on verified projects, the givers you have in your account gain giving EXP (accomplishment in octalysis) in the area of the project they are donating. This creates a history for GIVers, linking each one to the projects they donated.

[karmaticacid]

To mint an NFT, you need to put in some funds for the minting + you also need to put in the GIV to create it? It would be great if we could use these NFTs to both:

1. Support GIV, preventing sale by virtue of the fact that people need to lock it to mint
2. Diversify our treasury by raising funds via the mint in, say, xDai

[sem]

Yes, it’s totally possible to lock a part of the funds and send the other part to the common pool, although I see that it might be bad for the user experience to have to pay in two coins. Alternatives could be:

• Pay entirely in GIV, part of it is locked within the NFT, part of it is exchanged for XDAI and sent to the common pool by the NFT contract.
• Pay entirely in XDAI, use part of it to buy GIV and lock it in to the NFT, use part of it to send to the common pool.

And it may fit better in the narrative of GIVers to send the money to donation.eth instead of the common pool.

I would suggest to continue with this proposal even if there is not a clear use of the NFT collection yet.
I think we will figure out a good use when we start implementing new features for the GIVeconomy, and new pieces of the puzzle will come out. I think having a collection of high quality NFTs will be very useful by then.

We could start by releasing the first $5,000 and having a set of community calls in which Alex and Santi show different options, receive feedback, and come back to the forum with the results of the investigation and the first set of 10-20 GIVers (a sort of television pilot). If the community approves them, the rest of the funding could be released in order to finish the collection.

I think this approach requires a lower commitment from the Giveth community (it does not need to decide on the tokenomics yet, nor provide a frontend dev to change the website) and can be done more independently, so it may not require a PM from Giveth that was requested in the governance call.

I would love to see Funnyverse starting to work with the community, Alex drawings are amazing and with the correct feedback they will to be able to provide an outstanding product for Giveth.

[okiave]

FWIW if I were to design lore around Giveth PFP NFT project I’d seek to source a creative writer as well who would incorporate nature based elements as properties into an evolving NFT story. The idea here being to bring back the awareness that we’re always in relation to our environment and part of the greater ecology using basic storytelling principles.

For example NFTs that hold charge or an in game/network benefit based on lunar cycle based time that releases rewards every 28 days. Or imagine incorporating a burning ritual to transform one element property of NFT into another (water>ether) to release and transform the NFT into another that includes a multiverse scavenger hunt clue to exclusive access on something.

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/folklore/Solar-Folklore.pdf

Also for the record this isn’t cultural appropriation idea but rather design approach that is informed by indigenous wisdom of being in relation to a greater living system. The progressively rolling out story would also support a cohesion among NFTs through a few changing properties based on specific actions that are taken.

[Cotabe]

I really love this project and how many people love Alex’s artwork.

I am willing to help push this project forward from Giveth’s side.

I think there are great ideas to frame this project.

I really like these ideas

@sem

We could combine different metrics, for example rarity and giving EXP:

• The probability of obtaining a rare GIVer (unpredictability and scarcity in octalysis) increases the more GIV you lock when you mint it and the minimum amount of time you won’t be able to unmade your GIVer.
• Every time you donate GIV on verified projects, the givers you have in your account gain giving EXP (accomplishment in octalysis) in the area of the project they are donating. This creates a history for GIVers, linking each one to the projects they donated.

But I agree also that:

@karmaticacid

It would be great if we could use these NFTs to both:

1. Support GIV, preventing sale by virtue of the fact that people need to lock it to mint
2. Diversify our treasury by raising funds via the mint in, say, xDai

and that:

@sem

it might be bad for the user experience to have to pay in two coins

Maybe combining all the concepts that I quoted, it might make sense to mint the NFTs with XDAI to diversify our treasury.

While gaining EXP and later on features (wearables or other for the NFT) as they donate and/or lock GIV.

Finally, I also agree that it might make sense to:

@sem

continue with this proposal even if there is not a clear use of the NFT collection yet.
I think we will figure out a good use when we start implementing new features for the GIVeconomy, and new pieces of the puzzle will come out

[santigs]

After reading all the great feedback I believe it is a good approach to start focussing on the art and move forward from there.
We will request an initial amount to create several designs and collection parameters and will share them to get the community feedback. After that, we will put another proposal to finalize the art and get everything ready for collection minting.
If the second proposal finally gets funded, we will also reduce the total amount as I will be project managing from inside Giveth.

[karmaticacid]

Can you post the request amount here and a bit of a small budget breakdown? Like x GIV for an expected y hrs of design?

[santigs]

We propose an initial amount of 5K Dai (or the equivalent in GIV) representing half of the total cost for the collection conception and design where all these elements will be developed.

1.- Studying the particular needs and characteristics of the DAO to find an appropriate theme that can fit the expectations in terms of subject, tone, aesthetics, etc. Imagining how to create a set of PFPs that members of the DAO can collect and proudly wear as an avatar is paramount and it needs its time and research to create a unique product that stands out from other copycat collections that are popping out.

2.- Collection naming study. Finding a catchy, appropriate name for the PFPs that can represent the community by trying to find bonding elements to which any member can feel attached to. In our case, humor is one of our pillars so we want to find a memorable name that brings a smile to everyone and enforces the message.

3.- Sketching phase where several approaches are tested regarding composition, character possible looks, element positioning for the generative art, backgrounds, etc. This collection will be hand-drawn by an artist with special attention to detail and will have a tiny, exclusive set of PFPs that won’t be generative, but uniquely drawn for the occasion.

4.- Presentation of 5 finished pieces in full color as a sample of the look of the future collection.

[sem]

It looks exciting, although please do not limit it to 5, the idea is to have a complete understanding on how the collection will look like before it’s completely made and it’s completely funded.

This initial funding should be used to resolve all the doubts that there are on the collection on how it will look like and the traits that PFPs will have, so the rest of the funding can be released to complete the collection without any uncertainty.

The proposal has my full support, and I look forward having those NFTs in my wallet.

[santigs]

As the proposal for the initial phase has passed, I will start working with Funnyverse to show some art proposals to get your feedback. The idea is to reach a consensus to move forward and get the whole collection in the second phase.