Submit Launchpad Allocation Proposals Here

Please submit your proposals below. The more detail you can add, the better!

We will spend the next month collecting suggestions for how best to handle launchpad allocations. In January we will go through all submissions, remove any duplicates and then hold a community vote.

Depending on the number of submissions we receive, this may be a series of elimination votes or if there are only a few individual submissions a single large one.

For more details read this blog Governance Events: Stablecoin and Launchpad Allocations | by Jon Grove | SingularityDAO Ai-DeFi | Dec, 2021 | Medium

Have fun! We look forward to seeing what you guys suggest!


I would like to see a hybrid between FCFS and Guaranteed Allocation.

Token holders that have 2000 or more SDAO tokens should be able to purchase a max of 2500USD worth of IDO tokens instead of 5000USD. (Guaranteed allocation)

The remaining tokens should go to FCFS for token holders that have anything below 2000 SDAO tokens.


Two waves:

  1. First wave (1h): 80% total guaranteed allocation for SDAO holders proportional to how many tokens they hold (excluding obviously exchanges and contracts etc.)
  2. Second wave (23h): All remaining tokens are sold FCFS fashion to everyone, remaining tokens, if any, are burned

I would propose a progressive weighted distribution of guaranteed allocation by amount of SDAO token (minimum of 2,000) as well as FCFS (at least 30% of of the total token)

A progressive weighted distribution framework should be based on sum of total amount of SDAO token and number of token holders in a segment(group.)

For an instance, let’s say we create 3 groups of SDAO holder by amount of SDAO tokens. 70% of total guaranteed allocation is used in this framework.

Group A : 20,000 or more token holders, 33.4% of allocation within this framework. Caps at 5% of total allocation within this group
Group B: 10,000 or more token holders, 33.3% of allocation within this framework. Caps at 2% of total allocation within this group
Group C: 2,000 or more token holders, 33.3% of allocation within this framework. Caps at 0.5% of total allocation within this group

Ratio of Distributed allocation (33.3%) and caps (0.5%) in each segment should be calculated by sum of total amount of SDAO token and number of token holders in a segment(group) at certain date and time.


I would like the holding time to be included in the calculation. Also smaller max caps with more guaranteed allocations, part of the allocation could be done by FCFS mechanics. Above replies are interesting to consider.


To add more detail and my own vision.

Registration & KYC announcement: 1 week prior to KYC

Registration & KYC: 1 - 2 weeks for KYC and registration.

Allocation and ICO data announcement: at least 1 week prior to ICO.

First wave: lasts 3 days. No rush to complete. No overloaded servers. Maximum contributions per tier calculated after KYC, based on interest and tier levels. One issue with an assumed allocation to all holders is that they will all purchase. Likely, many won’t, and this shifts a good amount of the token distribution over to first come first serve. So, rewarding active members, registration at KYC automatically places them in the right tier.

Second wave: (24 hours). Built into the smart contract and website are features that prevent unnecessary spending of gas. Ie, reverts in the smart contract and requirements in the html/javascript that won’t allow authorization of impossible-to-spend ETH. I feel like tens of thousands of dollars–or more-- were wasted on gas fees during the NuNet launch because these features were not implemented.

Proposal - KYCed Allocation

Step 1: KYC Period The process would begin by participants passing KYC, as usual.

Step 2: Smart Contract Registration Once the KYC period ends, a smart contract will become available. All wallets that passed KYC need to register with the smart contract within a certain period of time.

Step 3: Allocation Viewing After smart contract registration ends, the available tokens will be allocated evenly between all registered wallets, and the wallet owners will be able to view how many tokens they will be able to buy.

Step 4: Purchase Period Once the purchase period begins, all wallets will have the option to contribute what they need to purchase their allocation; they can purchase all, or just a part of their allocation. Once the purchase period ends, any remaining tokens not purchased which will move on to the FCFS phase.

Step 5: First Come, First Served Period Any remaining tokens which were not purchased in the purchase period will be available to all registered wallets to purchase on a FCFS basis.

Conclusion: This system promotes fairness by giving everyone the option to purchase the same amount of tokens, but also gives a chance to purchase more if not all tokens are bought in the first purchase period.


i propose that we use 2 stable coins, on on ethereum and on on bsc, this would creat a healthy ecosystem where we keep oout current liquidity in the pools and add more by reducing the gas fees on busd liquidity pools over time the busd pools will fill up, and it would best that we go with poligon unless ethereum goes to 2.0 and reduces its gas prices. but those are the best options is see. we need more liquidity in the long run and usdt on ethereum is just not the answer to the future of finance.

1 Like

Olá, eu proponho o uso de 2 moedas estáveis, USDC e DAI, assim teremos um ecossistema mais saudável e menos arriscado do que o USDT. Entendo que o uso da rede ethereum simplesmente não é a melhor solução, pois suas taxas estão altíssimas atualmente. Att.

I think it’s an excelent proposal. I would add a rigorous KYC procedure before any guarantees of allocation. If we had a proportional/weighted guaranteed allocation in the NTX launch there would be enough tokens to please everyone who participated in the whole process. I hope the SDAO community recognizes that’s the fairest proposal. It puts together holders belief in the project and a credible opportunity to keep contributing to the ecosystem.

I am glad to see that you like some of my conceptual ideas. It is my pleasure to discuss methods to make the SDAO platform outstanding as a project.

At last, one last conceptual idea that gives the SDAO launchpad unique flavor. It is reasonably viable to do this given the fact that Dynasets is on the releasing stage. Also it’s ‘fun’ part that encourages everyone to participate.

Since the SDAO is an AI based platform, it will be interesting to allocate 10% or slightly more of guaranteed allocation to those who provide the input (conceptual parameters) to plot the best scenario case potentially used by Dynasets’ algorithms.

I am taking a wild guess that Dyanset is developed in a manner to handle chained parameterized inputs to process statistical analysis on dataset prepared by ML algorithms alongside a mathematical model on natural language processing that examines media sources with regards to business, economic and financial environments dynamically changing on a daily basis.

I believe the same chained related processes can be applied to provide guaranteed token distribution a unique taste.

Let’s say that we will have a 10% allocation from total token distribution for this and you ask for a potential approach (conceptual solution) to the SDAO problem currently facing. Not necessary at academic or professional level, it should be at conceptual level that everyone can participate. Then, let Dynasets AI (or maybe another AI) create a model for conceptual solutions. Several solutions that plot the best case scenarios (by AI) and the amount of contribution potentially worth (measured by AI and human) should be awarded for guaranteed token or pre-access to Dynasets liquidity pool.

I would guess the process to rate conceptual solutions submitted by everyone, AI, human, and SDAO holders, the public (possibly by weighted distribution of rating points) should be able to participate in.


I can’t improve on the excellent suggestions above, but I wanted to add the reference for Fair Item Allocation - Fair item allocation - Wikipedia - which has some fairly well detailed fairness criteria, Use Cases and algorithms documented. It is good practice to define the desirable outcomes, then test which combination of algorithms/allocation proposals best fit the need before any rollout. If that desirability could be defined first, the Community support may be easier to gain, and the feedback for improvements more focused and effective.

1 Like

Is there a risk that large stake token holders will just split their wallet allocation to <2000?

1 Like

I suggest using a similar system as VENT finance. This is a combination of BGA (based guaranteed allocation) and combined with a form of staking rewards. This way you give more reasons to hold the SDAO token. I’ll link their medium I think you should give it a look! Gives the token even more utility!


The following is pretty much what the Starlaunch project uses for their launches.

A dedicated right-to-buy token, let’s call it RTB:

  1. You stake SDAO or AGIX to earn RTB.
  2. You put in these RTB in the TGE - or you save them for a later TGE.
  3. Putting in RTB in the TGE gives you the right to buy the TGE tokens. The amount you put in dictates the share you have a right to buy of the full TGE.


  • Maximum chance for successful project funding. People are guaranteed a minimum allocation but if left unused, then others can fill it.
  • Just: Avoids First-Come-First-Served and everyone staking SDAO/AGIX is guaranteed rights to buy.
  • End user control: End user decides how much to stake, and when to start staking and when to use up the gained RTB tokens.
  • The launched token becomes more clearly “linked” to the wider SNET eco system, giving more exposure it.
  • Encourages both getting and staking of SDAO/AGIX. This is positive for those tokens and also makes the very SDAO platform more valuable because it draws in new people to use its services.

Further notes
The spent RTB tokens are burnt at TGE.
It is possible to cap the guaranteed share dynamically to prevent from whales taking over. This is superior to the static caps we’ve had in the past, because the project can decide if they allow whales in case there is not enough “shrimp money”. All parts are happy.


Purchases can be made in waves. But before defining the waves, everyone must know their allocation.
I suggest making a points system, based on the number of SDAO tokens, and how long the tokens are allocated in the wallet, stake or farm.
Many people buy SDAO tokens a few days before launchpad and sell them later.
I think people who hold SDAO tokens should be rewarded for this as they are supporting the SDAO project.

  1. announcement of an IDO with exact information about the registration period with KYC and question how much SDAO/AGIX the person owns (with indication of the Wallet address as proof) and if necessary with which currency the person participates in the IDO (stablecoin etc.).At the end of the period you will know how many people are participating.

In the second step you have to analyze (here you can take your time, no one pushes you to get something out in 1-2 weeks) who holds how many tokens since when. For each full year (long time holder) they should be preferred accordingly (e.g. per year + 10% more tokens).
If you know that you have 100 million tokens available for the IDO, about 80% guaranteed (about 80 million tokens) should be planned for the first 24 hours. But it should be considered in the fix planning for e.g. Tier 1-4 about 50 million tokens of the 80 million tokens and for the long term holders in the form of the above described bonus the possibility to get more (30 million tokens). Important!! the 80 million will not be communicated to the community, because the number is not fixed.

With e.g. 2500 successful registrations/KYC a rough calculation should be made with Tier 1/Tier 2/Tier 3/Tier 4. It is important that the calculation is only evaluated after the number of participants and their AGI shares have been submitted. Tier 1 (1000 to 10,000 AGIX = 100 USDT) / Tier 2 (from 10,001-25,000 AGIX = 250 USDT ) / Tier 3 (from 25,001-50,000 AGIX = 500 USDT) / Tier 4 (over 50,000 AGIX = 500 USDT + small additional bonus for whales :smiley: (100 USDT) = 600 USDT).

E.g. If 300 people (over 50,000 AGIX) ; 600 people (25-50,000 AGIX) ; 1000 people (10-25,000 AGIX) ; 600 (from 1000-10,000 AGIX) hold. With these exemplary figures I come to 790.000 USDT.

And now we come to the bonus of the long term holders. if we simplify now. that we say e.g. 4.2 years have passed since AGIX introduction, or later assumed1 year has passed for SDAO holders, they would receive a bonus of exemplary 10% per year. The minimum quantity of 1000 AGIX must be taken into account. The bonus should be independent of how many AGIX one holds at the time of the IDO (but at least Tier 1 number). Long term holders should be rewarded, no matter if rich or poor and from which country they come. If we simplify now and say that there are people who hold AGIX for at least 4 years in the above mentioned minimum amount of 1000 AGIX, then they have the right to buy 10% per year x 4 years = 40% on their entitled Tier 1-4 additional tokens. (there are about 30 million tokens available for this purpose. Maybe only 20 million tokens will be bought by the community, but the long-term holders have been given the opportunity to be rewarded for their loyalty to the AGIX project.

  1. After 24 hours, the rest of the 100 million tokens can be sold with FCFS. As singularitynet did it in their ICO (36 seconds the rest was sold :wink:
1 Like

would like to see a hybrid between FCFS and Guaranteed Allocation.

Token holders that have 2000 or more SDAO tokens should be able to purchase a max of 2500USD worth of IDO tokens instead of 5000USD. (Guaranteed allocation)

The remaining tokens should go to FCFS for token holders that have anything below 2000 SDAO tokens.

With the USDT stable currency, I don’t think it’s viable due to the ballast issue.

The priority would be bitcoin and Ethereum as the main option, as both have the highest market value and are more attractive to use Dynasets

I do not need to repeat the good suggestions above, but would like to express my support for those who advocate for a combination of guaranteed allocations and FCFS. Guaranteed allocations in my view implies that there will be some kind of treshold in terms of how many SDAO one must hold to hold to obtain it.

I advise the team strongly to avoid suggesting a system where holding x amount of SDAO only give a certain % likelihood of getting an allocation. I think such systems will cause alot of people to be discontent everytime there is an IDO because they feel “unlucky”.

1 Like