Building a Stronger Token Economy

Biggest issue between the token <> NFT dynamic is the lack of clear understanding/outline between the two.

Our perspective is they’re both needed:

  • $HVND token:
    • A great liquid tool for things like:
      • Partnership (See parallel token swap)
      • Rewards:
        • Platforms like stadium - engaging, etc. earns small or large amount of tokens.
  • BLVK acolytes NFTs:
    • Great way for the community to feel engaged at an ‘equal’ level.
    • Easy voting system, clear outcomes, etc.

However; currently these two aren’t linked

There are currently two distinct BLVKHVND supporters: tokens and NFTs, these need to be linked:

  • Creating a relationship between the two;
    • Those that purchase acolytes earn BLVK tokens
    • Those that have significant holdings of BLVK are given an acolyte (at a specific snapshot date)

This creates the needed link between the two, as a token holder I’m given the same ‘membership’ NFT as the nft holders and as a NFT holder I am intro’d into the world of liquid tokens.


The way the above is communicated is arguably more important then the change itself:

  • Ensuring token holders don’t feel left behind by the NFT project - this is just the membership / low hanging fruit voting mechanism.
    • While the token treasury / vote is the longer term value capture/liquidity market for BLVKHVND.
  • Ensuring NFT holders don’t feel left out of the value capture process (and if they do, to buy the token)

Why are these tokens are useful?

  • NFT for base level membership, low level governance over nouns treasury.
  • Token for endgame value capture membership, token swaps, liquidity, etc.

Open questions

  • Endgame of governance is still interesting - to us feels like token should be the primary financial controller. While the NFT strictly governs the ETH treasury in the nouns contract, while the token controls token swaps, etc, etc.
    • Still slightly messy but can be evolved over time.

Potential Strategy:

By the 100th mint, we roll out an experience to claim $HVND tokens from the BLVKHVND treasury, creating a bond between both ACOLYTE holders and HVND token holders + crowdfund participants. The rollout would occur in 2 stages:

  • A snapshot would be taken on the start of the 101st auction to grab the current holders of ACOLYTES and give them early rewards for contributing to our nouns-like treasury. Rewards would also be awarded to auction bidders, proposal writers, and prop voters.
  • A claim UI would be deployed 1 month after the snapshot to deploy rewards to holders as auctions continue as well as enable the exchange/sale of ACOLYTES on secondary, and facilitate the sale of voting power (like Agora) over time.

I want to prioritize the deployment of a HVND proposal to bring more parity to the OG community, and open up more opportunities for ACOLYTE collection, governance participation, and a dynamic token with value.

Rewards Sheet (WIP): Joining HVND reward program - Google Sheets

Discord Discussion: Discord

Shoutout to James + UselessCrypto for their work on setting up this conversation.

1 Like

I love the motivation and thought put in here so far. I thought about it for 15 minutes or so myself and it twisted my fkn mind! My 2c: I wonder if there are other DAOs who came across similar scenarios? What did they do, how do they work now etc? How did any fail? What has been tried/tested and how can we prevent re-inventing a square wheel?


Thank you!

It is pretty nuts that we have legacy tokens and nfts and a completely new nft + governance model to wrestle with. To be honest, I don’t have a lot of research on token deployments in a similar fashion as ourselves but I’ll grab what I can find out and share it!

I can say I’ve seen nft/token pairs (like Loot/Adventure Gold) where we’ve seen a lot of early dumping occur after an initial layer of liquidity had been provided. Because we don’t have any liquidity for our token this bridging we are creating can be seen as a move to create parity and the ability for members on both sides of the HVND (nft or token) can find themselves interested in the other asset.

Very interesting discussion. I really like the idea that Acolytes get some HVND for their investment but stand to earn more by active participation. “low level governance” is maybe not the nicest way to put it for acolyte holders though! Could we characterize the nouns DAO as the vanguard/experimental/VC arm of BLVKHVND DAO? It will be quicker to discuss and vote and pay out funds, filled more with engaged participants rather than long term more passive investors. It would do the scouting and offer small deals to teams or make initial investments in new ideas and projects. If these are successful then the HVND dao should take over funding from the Acolytes. In the case of the PUBG team for example, if they continue to be successful then the HVND can take over the contract, maybe even returning some of the initial investment to the Acolytes, enabling them to keep scouting/experimenting.

1 Like

how about HVND Treasured GOODs + SILVER HVND OF AFFLUENCE will got benefit on there?

So they will be added to the benefit as all og nft holders are part of the discussion of legacy.

Totally agree here. I think poor choice of words aside, I think the view is:

$ACOLYTES = marketing / competition / brand arm
$HVND = token swaps / staking / asset acquisition / vc arm

This isn’t to say ACOLYTES can’t play in the spaces of the $HVND, its just considering the erc20 nature of $HVND gives us a lot of play space within defi. I think pushing ACOLYTES as the “front-end” of crypto / governance for the growing web2 fanbase we have is a powerful conduit for conversion.

I do like the idea that ACOLYTES are the explorers of ideas and the $HVND then retains those contracts afterward keeping the funding within a discovery context.