Hello @Lanzer, thank you for your comments and questions so we could clarify about the native staking of the APE tokens.
“Shoot, we could even do a follow-up SIP to choose a delegate that we majority vote agree with.”
While this is a valid consideration, one of the core objectives of this proposal is to drive greater discussion and activation within TSB DAO. Delegating this responsibility would detract from the framework’s intended purpose of fostering engagement and alignment.
" With the new changes coming to ApeCoin, where the minimum contribution threshold is 500K-ish, our 100K investment won’t get us negative attention that Moca’s 6M vote does, AND we’ll be seen as a positive contributor to the space, AND we’ll jump start our road to budget sustainment."
You’re right—our 100K investment was chosen deliberately to avoid negative optics. Starting with a small but meaningful amount aligns with our goal of building a positive reputation while fostering trust to build on the cross-DAO relationships.
“I see the current vote is majority NO, but I think you should heavily stress the value that native staking on ApeChain returns back to the DAO. Perhaps do a quick monthly/yearly calculation”
We completely agree. We’re actively working on APY return calculations to communicate the benefits of native staking on ApeChain clearly.
*“… and then do a quick X Space with theKuntaMC and all the delegates.”
We’re arranging an X Space to outline these and address new or existing concerns in more detail, report the staking APY returns the DAO could expect, and provide a platform for continued direct discussion ahead of the final vote.
We’ll share the date and time for the Space here ASAP, and I hope everyone who has participated in this discussion can join so we can continue the conversation.
@CedricL and I genuinely appreciate the thoughtful insights and engagement this proposal has inspired, and regardless of the outcome, we’re eager to collaborate more closely with community members on future proposals.