PTD-D: How to Make Sure We Don't Distribute to Lost Wallets?

Author: CryptoGotchi GotchiID: 8612 Quorum requirement: None (poll) Discussion: https://discord.com/channels/732491344970383370/1392863251741802527

Poll (the winning option will be used for the core-prop of "A Partial Treasury Distribution").

Summary:

Some wallets that would, under "PTD-C", be eligible to be part of the distribution may be lost or inaccessible.

Should we implement a proof-of-life requirement? If so, how should it look?

A. The wallet must have interacted with the Base Diamond before the AGIP associated with this proposal concludes.

B. The wallet must have voted on any AGIP in the past 6 months before this AGIP concludes (a vote on the AGIP associated with this proposal would count).

C. The wallet must have executed at least one transaction (any kind of transaction) on Base or Polygon in the last 6 months.

D. We should distribute to lost wallets as well.

FAQ

Why both a sign of life (PTD-D) and a claiming period (PTD-E)?
PTD-D makes sure we don't unnecessarily dilute DAO members' shares. Let's say we hypothetically had a whale eligible for half of the entire distribution, but the wallet has not had any transactions in the past 2 years. Not excluding this wallet would cut everyone else's shares in half.
PTD-E takes care of false positives left after PTD-D was applied. While this doesn't prevent dilution, it prevents locking up funds indefinitely that would otherwise never be claimed.