Personally my vote is for:
Limiting the DOT distribution to the same amount as the combined value of LOCKDROP 1 + 2 which is about $70m…
There are some whales in the DOT community that could eat up all this PLM and gain a dominant share of the market…
ETH is more evenly distributed right now especially among DeFi + CEXs…
For example:
KR1 (Early investor of PLM) holds 1% of all DOT tokens…
So if they decide to go all in on PLM then they would just dominate the distribution and centralize the project…
So yeah tread with caution…
My other suggestion is to stake all DOT as a validator and all the earned DOT is distributed to all early investors…
Then allow as much DOT as you want!
I understand that the projects needs DOT to use for the auction. So on one hand there is a pressure to lock up DOTs.
On the other hand the PLM dollar value of locking DOT should at least not be better than the dollar value of locking up ETH has been. Because if that was the case then this should have been communicated to ETH lockers so they could have chosen to simply swap their ETH for DOT and get a better deal. Currently, I doubt many people would lock up ETH if they had known that they could have just waited and swapped the ETH to DOT and locked than instead more favorably.
At the least lockers of ETH should be treated as well (if not better, because they were earlier) than lockers of DOT.
As after 2 lockdrops PLM token already widely distributed between ~10K participants, my understanding that for 3rd lockdrop it’s better to set a cap equal to the amount which is needed to secure a parachain slot.
The entire time of the proposed lockdrops, the 3rd round has always been clearly outlined as arguably the best deal. It would be inexcusable to change the terms of the 3rd round now… after so many waited based off of what was originally communicated. Let’s stick to what was provided to the public as the metrics for the 3rd round. Many of us that support this project have waited specifically for the 3rd round. People in round 1 or 2 could have, and may have, sidelined DOTs. It was their option given what the documentation outlined for the lockdrops. The Plasm documentation has always shown the 3rd round to be highly advantageous… please stick to what you originally communicated via documentation, Plasm team.
In case if the Plasm does not win the parachain auction, the locked DOTs will be returned to their owners, but what happened with PLM token? My thoughts that in this case PLM tokens should not be issued.
Another thought about some vesting period for PLM token if Plasm win the parachain auction, to have some algorithm how auction participants claim their PLM tokens, e.g. wait some time before claiming to prevent price dump after listing or claim by some parts.
And one more thing about attracting more people who earlier locked their DOTs in auction receive more PLM tokens.
In case if the Plasm does not win the parachain auction, the locked DOTs will be returned to their owners, but what happened with PLM token?
Obviously, we won’t issue PLM token for this. And we can be a Polkadot Parachain sometime. So important thing is that you need to join the auction which Plasm wins to get PLM.
Another thought about some vesting period for PLM token if Plasm win the parachain auction, to have some algorithm how auction participants claim their PLM tokens, e.g. wait some time before claiming to prevent price dump after listing or claim by some parts.