The Dust that Settles

We are about to vote on the Final Closeout for shutting down Reverse as a protocol and retiring it into a community of like-minded web3 enthusiasts with a strong shared history.

After we are done dispersing all of the liquid funds from the treasury, there will be an amount of locked tokens that do not have significant liquid value, as well as potential value for stake held in projects that may accrue at a later time due to participation at an earlier stage.

This is the nature of web3, and as such it creates a complication in shutting everything down.

There have been several suggestions for how to proceed here. Two suggestions include the formation of a Leftover Club:

Inclusive Club

An inclusive club will essentially keep the project intact, just with no overhead of managing investments. This means we use the snapshot of holdings for the cashout to determine future distribution of funds as they come available.

Pros:

• Everyone has incentive to stay engaged.
• Equitable distribution of the full value of the treasury over time based on RVRS holdings.

Cons:

• Keeps the project on the hook indefinitely. No clear end in sight.
• Our project leaders are still exposed to much of the same legal risk as before, just with less value to justify it.
• No closure for community members. The need to constantly check back in to make sure they aren't missing something could become onerous.
• Those running things will still have to get paid for their time, eating into the profits to distribute.

Exclusive Club

This club would be exclusive, requiring a one-time membership fee of 1k RVRS to be burned prior to cashout. Paying this fee gets you a single membership into the club.

Pros:

• Allows closure for those who are ready to be done.
• Gives those wanting to stay engaged a path to being part of a smaller, more active group.
• Fair distribution of future value based on willingness to participate and take on a level of risk by forgoing cashing out all of one's RVRS.

Cons:

• Still keeps the project and project leaders on the hook, for both managerial effort considerations as well as legal obligations.
• Still no clean break. Project technically lives on indefinitely.
• Extra work created managing the new membership-only club to make sure governance of decisions is equitable and compensation for efforts is fair.
• Those running things will still have to get paid for their time, eating into the profits to distribute.

No Club

This is just what it sounds like: We shut it all down and it's all over. Anything that is remaining is left under the control of the people currently managing the project and the wallets. Consider it a parting gift from the community to the people who made this cashout happen for everyone.

The main idea here is simplicity. Since you all know the project leaders, you probably understand what they will do if there is any significant value in the future. This just saves us all the hassle of formalizing an official structure with overhead and legal implications in the meantime when there's less likelihood of any value worth deliberating over.

Pros:

• Clean break. Project is fully shut down and everything is accounted for in a simple, clean manner.
• If there's a small amount of profits, instead of everyone getting pennies, those who put in the most work will get some small, but reasonable compensation.
• Should there be any significant gains in the holdings, those in control can still decide to share the profit with exhodlers based on the existing snapshot, but the legal obligation is removed thus freeing the project leaders from the stress of managing that risk.

Cons:

• Less incentive for engagement to keep people connected with the community after the closeout.
• Potentially less to go around for everyone else, as any future value may not be distributed.

_

This has been discussed in-depth on our discord. Please refer to the discussion link to review the conversation around this proposal.

You can also review the details of the remaining items in the wallets in this document. Some are small amounts of perma-locked rewards that will produce an amount of revenue share from their host protocols. Some are time-locked rewards that someday will unlock and may or may not be worth much when that happens. And there are a few projects we invested in that crashed, but haven't expelled their final death rattle. Should they happen to resurface, there could be value in our holdings.

Our project leaders have volunteered to abstain from this vote on their own volition. Everyone is encouraged to cast their vote as they see fit.

• Voting is single-choice
• A 60% Majority is required to pass this vote
• Should results be contentious, we will revisit the proposal after further community deliberation