Illuvium Alliance Program

[exotic fjord]

Summary
This proposal Introduces the Illuvium Alliance Program, which incentivises content creators, partners, and guilds to refer their audiences to play Illuvium. The program will provide participants with a dashboard to monitor their referrals, track revenue generated, and calculate their earnings in ETH. The program aims to increase player acquisition and retention while generating significant revenue for the DAO.

Full IIP: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pILxI8xO33I0ywo_RltonU5K2l4PEXmrmuXrRYTFqZo/edit#heading=h.ympr4vvl41kq

[quartz fog]

Amen

[hazy aurora]

Really like this proposal and stoked to see the dashboard!

The 30 day codes is a nice touch to ensure continuous promotion 👌

The ONLY thing I would like to criticize and its nothing major...

Illuvium has 5 tiers of illuvials (excluding tier 0s)
And there's only 4 tiers here. Could easily add a toer for 5 to 10 Eth - feels like one is missing there already

[exotic fjord]

Aaron would be rolling in his grave with the lack of continuity. We can update it

[pale bramble]

Best thing I have read today 🤣

[echo trench]

So happy to see this hit the public

[hoary chasm]

More ways to take revdis from the token? There isn’t any influencer associated to ilv that makes this worth it

[zinc cedar]

I love referral/affiliate program, it's a proven concept.
examples: the commission is 3% of fuel sales, d1sk sales and tx fee?
how about promo d1sk sales?

about the size of commission, 17.5% is too much?

[hoary chasm]

Way too much, wasn’t land supposed to be the last thing that drained token revdis?

I think people then was concerned it would open the gates to more and more things taking revdis which is happening

[zinc cedar]

can I use my own code to use the system as a discount

[hoary chasm]

Yeah under this can’t I just make fake accounts refer myself and just receive revdis for playing?

[pale bramble]

My only concern is 30 days seems short. 60 Days would be more appropriate. Heroes of Mavia uses 90 but I'd argue thats too long. Hard to say if there's a 'right' answer unless airdrop seasons would always be 30 days, then aligning there could be great

[hoary chasm]

Also needs to specifically state that silv isn’t included in the revdis earned. When land was going around ilv was bragging about selling some insanely high number that was inflated by silv. If we pay out eth based on silv sales the treasury is going to go broke

[pale bramble]

Clearly you don't understand influencer marketing. The idea is this will bring in NEW buyers, giving you revdis you would not have had otherwise. Crypto gaming is too competitive to not do something like this otherwise every creator and their dog will ignore Illuvium since they cannot profit from its success.

[pale bramble]

It does not include sILV2 but yes it should mention it in the doc I agree

[echo trench]

sILV is excluded

[hoary chasm]

I do understand it I just don’t think it’ll work

[hoary chasm]

Does it specifically state that in the iip I might have missed it

If it doesn’t it should be added and not implied

[echo trench]

It wil be added to the doc

[pale bramble]

I understand the scepticism

[pale bramble]

I don't see how Illuvium works without it, but you are right there is risk it doesn't work in itself

I see risk both ways, and see its implementation as the lower risk

[hoary chasm]

My main thing is originally everyone said token is the only thing that gets revdis. Then it came that land gets revdis and it was promised nothing else would siphon revdis. Now there’s another thing that takes revdis. So it’s opening the flood gates to just keep adding shit that takes revdis

Why have faith there’s going to be revdis if things get added to take away from revdis. After 4-5 things that siphon revdis people won’t get hyped about revdis anymore because it goes to a bunch of different things

I’d probably be more okay with this if we increased the follower requirement

500 is how much you can buy on fiver

Should be 5k+

No one with money is watching someone with 500 followers

I’m also saying this with the knowledge that the idea is revenue will be generated to make up for the siphon but I think it sets a bad precedent

[pale bramble]

Yeah you know I am a big advocate for revdis, and I obviously have a billion biases with this proposal but I totally get it. Its the cost of marketing unfortunately and I don't see a way around it

[hoary chasm]

Let’s hire a competent marketing team that has experience first and have them come up with ideas lol

[pale bramble]

I'd agree with being upfront that we want revdis to end here

[hoary chasm]

Well that’s what was said with land

So ilv word on revdis is already weakening

[pale bramble]

This isn't removing revdis

[hoary chasm]

It’s siphoning

[hoary chasm]

Unless you meant something else by this

I took it as you meaning nothing else would siphon revdis

Which can’t be trusted because that was supposed to happen after land lol

[pale bramble]

U think affiliate marketing is a bad idea? As Kieran said it draws inspiration from Fortnite? So Fortnite is bad at marketing

[pale bramble]

Its not directly taking away revdis in the same way land is, but it has the potential to affect it yes

[hoary chasm]

Fortnite has major streamers that actually pulls a huge audience. Something that works for a large game isn’t for sure going to work for a small company that can’t even grow community numbers

[hoary chasm]

It’s really the same just on a smaller scale. It’s not taking 3% revdis as a base but it’s taking a %

[pale bramble]

Fortnite almost went bankrupt before making a battle royale

EVERYONE starts as a small company

[pale bramble]

I had 500 subscribers before Illuvium had any content creators besides Vetemor and Volkin. And lots of people with money watched my videos

[pale bramble]

I can see the argumentation with the 500 cap

I agree with a cap of 2k+ its a bit different

[hoary chasm]

Right but you don’t have the same strategy when small as you do when you grow

[pale bramble]

Affiliate marketing is synonymous with grow

[hoary chasm]

Even 2k is pretty easy to hit

5k is when people actually start getting audiences

[pale bramble]

But its better

[pale bramble]

As a creator I'd have to disagree

5k on Twitter

1k on YouTube/Twitch

1m on tiktok

that garbage platform

[hoary chasm]

Not targeting you specifically but since you threw out your numbers I’m just using them

1k on YouTube maybe

But how many are already here

And when people stream it’s mainly people here that are watching

Which is fine for you

[pale bramble]

Its also about mindshare

[hoary chasm]

But it isn’t generating many new eyes

[pale bramble]

Crypto Stache can make a video about any web 3 game

What happens when he starts doing every video about Illuvium

Thats what attracts 'new' creators

nothing else

[hoary chasm]

That’s where I’d agree to have some sort affiliate but specialized and targeted

[pale bramble]

Then those new creators bring new audiences

[hoary chasm]

The ilv give away for creators did literally nothing for our numbers

Because we weren’t growing it was all given out to people who were just showing to the discord

I hope I’m wrong btw

I just don’t see this being the time for this

Well

Revdis siphon

Now maybe something more targeted with specific numbers

[pale bramble]

Not everything has to be about numbers. If I am a creator with 5m subs. Am I going to talk about the project thats proven to give back to creators? Or the one that doesn't? All else being equal

[hoary chasm]

You’re going to talk about the ones that make money

[pale bramble]

I guess thats the beauty of the DAO too.

Same as we have the power to upvote this, we have the power to remove if it it fails

[pale bramble]

Yeah the proposal beats out everything else in the space

[hoary chasm]

Even if it fails and we take it away that still sets the precedent that we can keep siphoning revdis

[pale bramble]

And can unsiphon revdis

Write a proposal to take away the 5% from land

Full control is full control

[hoary chasm]

Doesn’t matter

Once you open the flood gate

It sets a bad precedent

Could take land away and vote this down

[pale bramble]

People need to approve it

[hoary chasm]

You still started the siphon

[pale bramble]

So u have no faith in the community

not the DAO

[hoary chasm]

lol I’m not investing in the community is all I’ll say

But I also only voted for one person in the dao and that’s easy to game

So I don’t have much faith in the dao structure itself

That’s a diff conversation though

[hoary chasm]

at the very least this shouldn't take from overall revdis. Should be a structured amount specific to $ amounts based on the tiers proposed and it should come from the treasury funds, not from the overall revdis

On top of follower requirements there should be a referral requirements, e.g. referred 100 people to ILV who downloaded the game and created an account.

[exotic fjord]

The idea is this will increase the amount of revenue distributions.

Currently, signing top-tier content creators is becoming increasingly expensive, as they demand substantial fees due to the high returns they're getting from other projects. Many of these creators are backing games with low float and low market caps, betting on the possibility of massive returns, which can be highly profitable for them.

Our proposed approach allows us to align payouts directly with the revenue generated. Ensuring we only spend on actual performance, greatly reducing our marketing expenses and financial risk

I was hesitant at first, and thought we could bring in a bunch of content creators through the previous capital raise we did but even then they were asking for prices around $25 just to promote. There are a few options:

1. We don't spend money on content creators at all
2. We pay them up front and risk low performance
3. We pay them a % of what they bring in

We have access to all of these big creators, it's not a matter of not having the relationships, but without paying them stupid amounts upfront (which i'm not willing to do) this is the only way I see us getting them in.

Obviously with the first option we can still grow organically like we have been, and we'll naturally pick up content creators along the way, but this seems like a low risk high reward play that will supercharge our acquisition

[hoary chasm]

so is this the end of what is taken from revdis? landsale was supposed to be the last thing that siphons revdis. instead of opening that door why not just take it from what the treasury earns and make it a set $ amount based on hitting certain tiers of downloads + revenue earned. Have a feeling this is going to keep happening and in a year or two tokens will get 25% revdis with all the dilution

[hoary chasm]

meant as a reply to this

I think Liquid proved(has proven?) that paying big influencers to play the game is useless so #2 is out

[quartz fog]

We need to maximize that first week so we have a story to tell.

Creators are going to be more likely, and feel more comfortable pushing the newest web3 game if their peers are all onboard, and this structure makes it attractive as hell for the creators. Creators who wouldn't otherwise be sharing the game with their audiences.

Gamers are the same, they follow the herd. We need to send a strong enough signal that people think 'fuck it I'll give it a try'.

[exotic fjord]

That wasn't an issue of the influencers, the game needed major improvements. If Gauntlet existed and we did the same campaign it would be completely different.

[hoary chasm]

possibly but I think it was a bit of both. No one really cared from their audience about the game and there was no way to capitalize, through sales, even if it captured an audience

[exotic fjord]

So we agree. Now we are able to generate revenue we can directly attribute a campaigns success to the ROI.

I mean, again, we also made money off the Team Liquid campaign..

[hoary chasm]

right but why does it need to be another siphon on revdis when land was supposed to be the last thing to siphon revdis

[exotic fjord]

It just didn't do well in terms of player acquisition. But I believe that will change once Gauntlet is out

[hoary chasm]

it's setting a precedent that instead of having funds in the treasury for these campaigns it just continuously takes from revdis

at what point do we stop siphoning revdis? after this it doesn't give me any confidence that I can rely on % of revdis remaining the same even over the next year

a structured $ payout would be much better coming from a marketing fund in the treasury

If you do structured $ payouts you can even give bonuses based on how much your referee spends/sells on the market

stuff like that, it gives much more variability without totally destroying the tokenomics

[quartz fog]

If we agree that we need big influencers, and that we do not currently have big influencers, don't we agree that the cost paid to the creators will be from new money to the project? money we wouldn't have otherwise captured.

[hoary chasm]

That still doesn't detract from the argument that the money should come from the treasury instead of revdis, instead of destroying the trust people have in the tokenomics you're using funds from what should be a healthy treasury

[exotic fjord]

Let's make a scenario, Ansem - one of the biggest influencers in web 3.

Right now it would cost us hundreds of thousands to get him to advertise Illuvium. Let's say the first month he advertising us we bring in an EXTRA $10m in revenue from all of the players he brings in. That will cost us 1.7m in revenue distributions. Which is insane right? $1.7m to a single guy. However, the remaining 8.3m is added to our revenue distributions.

So my question is do you want the 8.3m additional? Or would you rather keep a larger % of a smaller amount of distribution?

[exotic fjord]

We couldn't soley fund it from the treasury. The treasury is only getting 22% of rev dis currently. Which obviously will build over time as the game generates more revenue but still it is too thin to solely come from the treasuries portion

[hoary chasm]

it's not strictly about the $ amounts, that same exact argument can be made using funds from treasury. It's about continuously siphoning revdis from the token. How am I supposed to trust the amount of revdis % I'll receive per token if I'm not sure that there wont be 4-5 more campaigns, whatever you want to call this, that keeps taking from revdis

I'm not going to trust the long term tokenomics of a token that continuously changes how much I'm going to receive. It's a pretty similar affect on the token as being inflationary

but to a smaller scale

[exotic fjord]

Okay let's say anything that touched revenue distributions % 100 guaranteed that you would be earning more per token, regardless of how it affects your percentage.

Would you care? Or want more and more initiatives

[hoary chasm]

that's why it would be a % of how much the treasury earns or a structured $ amount based on certain tiers.

[hoary chasm]

short term I'd want the more money

but I would not be holding long term based on continuous changes

so it is + short term but makes it so it's not a long term hold for me

[exotic fjord]

You would stop holding even though you would be earning more money? Doesnt make sense

[hoary chasm]

It would, short term I'd be making more money. what happens when th bear comes, affiliates dry up, and more incentives are pulled out where I keep earning less and less % per token

I'm going to sell on a pump

[exotic fjord]

I'm saying a situation where all new initiatives guarantee you will earn more $ per token of ILV staked. Are you for that or against?

[hoary chasm]

if that could actually be guaranteed and it's a perfect world obviously, but none of these incentives can guarantee more money. We are talking hypotheticals. You're basically asking me would I hold BTC if you could guarantee it's going to 100m

Also I'm not saying I'm going to sell if this passes

[exotic fjord]

I'm trying to make a point that lower % but higher revenue earned per token is a good thing. Regardless of what changes.

[hoary chasm]

I'm saying it will make it so I reconsider my long term plan based on the fact I can't rely on the % of revdis I receive per token

and I know others will think the same

I actually had this exact conversation with a lot of people when the land received 5% of revdis

I said it'll be the last time and it's not much

but now I look dumb lol, that's outside the point that I don't think land was a good play either way but that's a different argument

[hoary chasm]

that part is, but the trust it loses in the tokenomics is a net negative

unless we pass an IIP that cannot be overturned that says this will be the last time, then it jsut has to be proven to be a good IIP and wont lose any trust

I think the base of this IIP is good, I think where the money comes from is bad, just to be clear

[exotic fjord]

Okay but let's say this launches, and it brings us in a stupid amount of additional revenue, so much so that it becomes abundantly obvious this was an amazing decision the DAO makes, but just before the results are posted, the DAO approves an IIP to never change rev distribution again. And then a new thing comes along, that again, lowers your % but generates you MUCH more money. We would all be sitting here saying "dang, I wish we didn't pass that rule that we can't change rev dis".

Which is my whole point here. We are a DAO, and if something is going to make the DAO more money we should be able to make a decision.

Remember as well, an IIP can take this away just as quickly. And I would 100% be in favour of that too. I also make my money off revenue distributions. The sole reason im proposing this I believe it will make us more money and bring us more players.

[lucid shuttle]

awesome proposal, the only thing I think that can be improved is that the earnings should be distributed in ILV, not ETH. Distributing in ILV will lead to further buying pressure.

I really like that the reward is directly tied to the revenue generated, making it a win-win in any situation

[quartz fog]

Cool thought, although I wonder if the big orgs / agencies would accept ILV or if that could disqualify us

[zinc cedar]

tbf fortnite didnt sell token to retail promising 100% revdis

[quartz fog]

From memory someone like Team Liquid would only accept ETH/USDC/USD

[lucid shuttle]

you got a good point there. I'm biased but ILV is liquid and can easily be sold on Coinbase/Binance. I don't know if ILV can be sold on Fireblocks for institutions

[quartz fog]

Yeah I like the idea don't get me wrong, maybe Tarren has had more conversations and can confirm or deny what I suspect

[royal berry]

Revise the % cap lower and/or distribute it in ilv with a vesting schedule?

[quartz fog]

Remember we want to package this up for Web2 creators and make the barrier to entry low.

[exotic fjord]

I originally had that but it makes it much harder to do the payouts with price fluctuations and tiers

[quartz fog]

Let's imagine this is aimed at bringing in some of the biggest Pokémon creators in the world for example.

[royal berry]

Getting a guy like ansem in will help onboarding web3 guys. But isn't the grand dream of ilv is to be the best web3 game and onboard web2 players?
Would this program be effective for that?

Normies don't know ansem or even gcr

[lucid shuttle]

the payout can be done with TipLinks, this immediately allows you to offramp to your credit card without KYC

but I concede the point

[royal berry]

It is definitely a sloppy slope to siphon away from "100% revdis" for token holders. That was the main pitch from the beginning.

[lucid shuttle]

or maybe have a claim page where influencers can choose how to receive their incentive, with ILV being one of the choices

[royal berry]

If u distribute the reward in ilv, at least it wouldn't lower purchase power effective on token price from revdis.

[zinc cedar]

Wont they prefer in stables then?

[lucid shuttle]

I think this proposal will be revolutionary, but only if enough creators are aware of its existance

[quartz fog]

Most probably those Web2 guys would prefer Stables yeah.

ETH is a happy medium for the majority I'd think.. I'm sure we can create a neat single page guide on how to off-ramp for the Web2 n00bs

[zinc cedar]

i understand @hoary chasm concerns.
but im more concerned about revenue now, 83% of something is better than 100% of nothing

and no, please not in ILV
they are just gonna dumpeet

[quartz fog]

Gotta make that splash week 1.

If we go big week 1, people will gravitate to us.

[zinc cedar]

yea market is in the dumpster rn.
we gotta spend money to make money

imagine amouranth streaming ILV:
Use this code "jiggle"

[hoary chasm]

Gotta make silv not be used week 1 if y out want a big launch

[exotic fjord]

This is targetting both web2 and web3.
Right now we are priced out on Web3 influencers. We could spend it but I'm not confident on the ROI.
For web2 when they see it's a good game plus the % they can earn it will make it much easier for us to acquire them.

We had to wait until retention was there before we could start pushing initiatives like this. Overworld it's great, Arena after these updates will likely be even higher

For Zero it's the airdrop, but by the time the airdrop finishes it will have many more features to make it sticky

[zinc cedar]

im not gonna use my silv2 if ilv at this price

[hoary chasm]

Yeah that’s true but also it’s better for us if price is low and people are willing to burn anyway

[exotic fjord]

Updated and added Tier 0 also

[exotic fjord]

Fortnite is 14 days, I think double is fine.
Creators just need to make sure they always reference their code in content. Guilds need to keep it top of mind.

[zinc cedar]

lets see if i can arrange people to use my code and split the difference 50/50

[obtuse cargo]

Great incentive, tbh. It drops the cost of paying influencers upfront, who usually offer a high chance of minimal return. Most influencers could/would pocket the money and put very little effort into promoting, since they already received their paycheck, giving them no real incentive to 'go harder'.

With this initiative, it massively minimizes the risk of low ROI from the 'marketing' investment and encourages people to work harder for growth, knowing there could be a higher return for them in the long term. They'd be creating growth not only for themselves but also for the DAO at the same time.

I thought I'd throw in some numbers in case anybody is concerned - using today's rough market numbers:
Top-tier payment: 17.5% - They bring in 10 ETH of revenue ($29,300). Influencers get paid $5,175.50, while the DAO gains $24,172.50 in revenue for the month.
Some big influencers want as much as $50K to promote a product, and usually, they might only do a few videos and talk about it for the month, then ask for more money down the track to continue promoting - Not saying they would.. but it could happen

In the long term, this is definitely more beneficial for the DAO when considering marketing costs vs ROI

Those who earn the ETH might just throw it back into the games ecosystem lol

[pale bramble]

But how annoying is it for users?

Its hard to say tbh

[quartz fog]

That's on the influencers/creators to push the message and have a strong relationship with their community

[exotic fjord]

We would make it as frictionless as possible. The idea is they love their favourite creator and want them to earn money from their purchases.

[pale bramble]

I think you will see friction if this component is on the website only. But as soon as it's ingame it should be solid. Same as the fuel exchange.

[compact ivy]

Love this idea! Personally think going up to 17.5% is too high though. 0-10% would be right for the tier range imo.

[heady lance]

Very happy with the proposal. I think everyone can agree we need a way to encourage content creators to talk about Illuvium and this kind of system would provide enough incentive to bring in large names into Illuvium. Most people probably dont realize that Illuvium has this one great advantage over other web3 projects and that is generating actual revenue. Most web3 projects can only pay the influencers with their limited funds and their token, creating extra selling pressure and inflation. Here we are talking about a product that earns money and spends money like a real business should. Potential earnings for top creators could get huge really fast and this will in turn bring in more content creators that want to participate.

This could potentially be the most important IIP for Illuvium DAO ever.

Regarding details of the program, here are some thoughts/questions:

1. How does silv2 fit into this? Am i correct to assume only eth payments count?
2. The idea to have people chose their favorite creator every month is very interesting. Very different from the standard "use my code to register" that we see in most games/apps. I really like it but i also feel like it encourages some unwanted behaviours such as making two accounts and using your own code for a 3% discount, or having people (not actual content creators) advertise themselves among players to use their code with promise of sharing the revenue with them (I am looking at you @zinc cedar ). As much as it wouldnt hurt the game, it could be seen as pretty annoying. (imagine wow chat with people spamming their code) Perhaps its not a big issue, we could simply have people banned for sharing the code in official channels or something.

Overall very happy with the IIP, this is what we needed.

[quartz fog]

My thinking here is that SaaS sales people are getting between 10-25% commission on deals.

If we want the biggest accounts , we should blow people out of the water and be undeniable

[heady lance]

A word to those that are not happy with the proposal because it drains revdis. I believe its time to understand that 100% revdis was a noble idea that turned out to be pretty unrealistic. Everyone in the crypto space has been widely optimistic about crypto back in 2021. Having seen the prices of NFTs from the last bull run, and the huge fees that projects earned, it was easy to assume that 10% revenue is enough to pay the bills. But its not, and now when the crypto space stuggles, we cannot afford to think the same way we did back in 2021. This is about survival. We can share the revenues and earn good money, or we can keep it all to ourselves and be left with a worthless token. To me this is a very easy choice.

It is also worth noting that we wont be giving away 17% of our revenue. Thanks to tiers, there will be a large number of small creators working for 3% to 7%, and I doubt that more than 50% of players will remember to resubscribe, so my guess is we will be looking at around 5% of revdis going to content creators, if not less. To me this is a very acceptable amount.

[echo trench]

Commissions on affiliates go up to 40%.

We've found a happy medium that's enticing enough for larger creators while not taking a major hit to DAO revenue.

Also it's important to note that it will only be a small % of creators that achieve that top tier commission

[magic turret]

This proposal expound on set precedents already. We had creator codes for merch and d1sks. The major differences here is that the codes are now specifically for game purchases and that there are tiers.

As sufficiently explained by both Kieran and tarren, while on the onset it looks like it detracts from revdis, it actually brings in more gamers outside the ecosystem thus bringing in more revenue channels from groups not originally interested or had no idea what illuvium is. Not to mention there's no money out. Roi is dependent on the type of players influencers bring in. If they under perform they don't get paid or they get paid less.

Also, it's good to note that vast majority of influencers would be in the lower tiers while maybe a handful would be eligible for the higher percentages. This ensures that while the barrier of entry is low, the dao is not risking loss of potential revenue to just every duck and Harry who self proclaims to be an influencer.

Lastly, I'd like to bring attention that the dao will be closely monitoring this and I expect several pivots in the form of iccps that would make the program more successful and hyperfocused as time passes.

[echo trench]

Regarding question 1, sILV2 will be excluded. Only ETH purchases will be counted.

[exotic fjord]

Just to be clear, this is also use my "link / code" to register

It's just after 30 days the code will need to be entered again. Or you can switch to another creator. Noting also - you can switch at anytime, I believe the limit would be every 24 hours. So let's say a content creator goes crazy and you no longer want to support them, you have that choice

[heady lance]

I wonder if it is in Illuviums interest to help creators and promote the program in game. Because it can either be "use code to register" and then the game never reminds the players to reenter the code and it is only up to creators to do that, or it can be phrased as cool feature in Illuvium that reminds players to input the code after 30 days, and might even feature most interesting creators on a website for people to check them out. Not sure this would be a good ROI though, probably not.

[glass crypt]

Incentive for big creators and performance based. Well done guys, I think it's as good as it can get. Maybe only thing is 500 twitter followers seems a bit low (unless there is also a case by case selection) but im sure you guys have thought this over a lot.
(Edit: just saw 0% commission for T0 so low entrance isnt as much of an issue)

[zinc cedar]

in mavia, we enter the code in the game

[zinc cedar]

i got 2k followers
use my code, reven

[heady lance]

I will. And then will use my silv2 to play the game and you get zero. nada.

[lucid shuttle]

Let's say I am referred by Ansem this month. In two years, do my purchases still give referral rewards to him? Imo this gimps token holders, referral rewards shouldn't be in perpetuity, they should end after x period (1 year?)

[heady lance]

It only works for 30 days unless you use the code again.

[glass crypt]

they end after 30 days unless you use his again (it will ask you after 30 i think)

[lucid shuttle]

Why would I use someone's referral code more than once that's an unnatural flow

[glass crypt]

to support them because they made more content and asked you again to use it? Or you decide not to like lots will

[zinc cedar]

otherwise they gonna shill once and have perpetual passive income

[magic turret]

It's to the daos advantage if a new user forgets to put a code in after the first 30 days cause the commission won't be awarded. That also means that there's a conscious effort on influencers to keep advertising illuvium and to use their code. Thus giving more free marketing for the project.

And the way Kieran explained it's mechanics is that it also allows users to 'cancel' their support and give it to a different person. That is also another incentive for influencers to continue giving value to its audience.

[exotic fjord]

Phase 2 of the build is for showcasing streamers. Top streamers for the week, by language etc

[light dove]

For any RevDis on our staked tokens we need Players.

This sounds like a great marketing strategy to bring those new players in by targeting the big name streamers who want to get that bread.

I'd rather sacrifice some revdis on my tokens than not get any at all.

Excited to see how this proposal pans out.

[dry quartz]

Am I correct in this is how the system would work:
1.) Every month it will reset back to zero
2.) As we build up we are only getting % commission thresholds as we climb in revenue.
example: First 30 days we bring in 20eth
0-.1 eth we get nothing
.1 - .5 we get 3% or .012eth
...
5-10 eth section we would get .625eth
then only the last 10 eth(of the 20eth) would get 17.5% or 1.75 eth

[echo trench]

You’d get 17.5% for the entire thing

[dry quartz]

Thank you for the clarification. And does it reset every month?

[echo trench]

Yes

[inland kindle]

If this brings in mainstream big name streamers because they think the extra income is worth the bit of potential backlash I’m all for it.

[rose stratus]

It would be a nice touch that once the 30 days is over to prompt the user with a message “hey do you still want to support Bobby Joe” instead of forcing them to find the code again for the same creator when they make more purchases.

[quartz fog]

The onus has to be on the creator to continue pushing Illuvium content and encouraging their audience to use their code.

The DAO has provided the vehicle for the creators to build a revenue stream but disagree the DAO should make it effortless.

There is enough friction currently that means the creator needs to continue delivering value to the DAO

[rose stratus]

I do agree that the creator needs to keep engaging and delivering value and referrals. I guess the onus will have to be drilled home from creators to use their link when purchasing. Hopefully Content creators will not get annoying in their videos having to repeat 5 times to use their code. That will not go well imho.

[inland kindle]

I should probably do a proper read however, what exactly is the benefit towards the code users for using the code? Usually when someone aka content creator partners with a game / promotes it in general there is some kind of benefit for the player to use the code. It might sound crazy but if they are just putting this in and gaining nothing extra themselves

i don't believe it will be quite as effective of a system as intended. Just a thought though based on other games implementations moreso in web2 space ofc

[inland kindle]

Just like how we all now wish we had raised 300 mil long ago instead of voting against it because the general community wasn't able to participate immediately in the token sale. Certainly there was fault on both sides since game development wasn't near where it was purported however, I think this old wound should hammer in the importance of what this proposal is trying to do now and why it's worth it even though the token holders "which at this point do very little to support the projects well-being" don't get the same percentage return. It's ultimately silly to complain too because if the game doesn't generate enough revenue to sustain rev dis as is but is otw successful enough that with modifications it can survive and eventually thrive, then that is the correct choice to make.

[zinc cedar]

yea usually u get some discount from using the CC/CT code.
or sign up bonus from CEX

thats why ill personaly offer a cashback

[rich talon]

I think this reward should be paid from the Revdis of DAO
Reason

1.ILV stakers never use their links, which means less Revdis of their own!
2.I think people who are going to know about illuvium and staking ILV will not use their links either.
3.If the use of sILV2 does not generate income for them, I don't think the reward this time will be that large!
I don't even think powerful influencers will promote illuvium if the rewards are small
4. I know there are people who want to support Hyperion and other guilds, they should be able to expect more rewards (I think growing the community is the quickest way to success).
5. this Revdis will not be so large for the staker, but there is a possibility that the staker will sell the ILV if there is an assumption that the influencer was paid a large amount of money and his own Revdis is less, this has nothing to do with logic at all!
6. right now the crypto gaming sector is almost dying, it's better not to stimulate stakers and investors too much, if they and VCs start selling ILV, Revdis will no longer mean anything!
7. If the bull market comes again and we are lucky enough to expect a lot of Revidis, we may be able to bring in more stakers!
8. If you are confident about the illuvium, there should be no problem to pay from DAO's Revdis, if the number of users increases, there should be no problem, and DAO's Revdis will also increase!

I was good friends with some of the Japanese guilds and Hyperion, and I hope they get paid as much as they can!

[zinc cedar]

yea i agree.
im more concern about generating traction and revenue than missing a few cents

[rich talon]

I agree.
I don't think the compensation we pay to influencers this time to be very large because of sILV2
Increasing the number of users is a marketing cost, this will be a cost that the DAO will have to pay
If you pay it out of Staker's Revdis, you may miss out on future Stakers.
I don't think you need to ruin your credit for a little payment.

And I think many web sites say that 100% of the money will be returned to the stakers.
Many dreams are spoken of there. hahaha🤣

[zinc cedar]

100% revdis was a good narrative.
was

[chrome narwhal]

So for background, I've been an influencer on my main channel for the past 6 years. One big thing I've noticed is you need to have some type of incentive for people to click on your link or else you often run into something called "bleed", where they bypass your link and go straight to the site to sign up for whatever reason. This even happens sometimes WHEN you incentivize them because people are dopey, but I would imagine it would happen a lot more if you didn't. So will there be some type of small reward to give new sign ups if they use our link?

[zinc cedar]

whats stopping whales to use their own code to get a rebate on their purchases

[south mulch]

you can't put your own code. you would need 2 accounts. at which point this would fall under multi-account exploiting and would probably be a bannable offense like in similar instances

would be good to clarify this and let people know tho.

[hasty phoenix]

Multi-accounting is illegal?

[south mulch]

i am assuming it is 😄 we don't know. it seems to be handled that way in other instances like arena leaderboards and now with airdrop points.

[hasty phoenix]

Maybe you can ask as council member and bring light to that shade.
Afaik it is totally legit to play on multiple Accounts, AT least was handled like that until now.

[south mulch]

for clarification talking about multi accounting to extract extra monetary value here. multi-accounts per se are fine.

[south mulch]

will do, we have a meeting now

[zinc cedar]

did u see or agree to a ToS or EULA when u started the game?

[south mulch]

found this to confirm

https://illuvium.io/terms-and-conditions

[hasty phoenix]

so multiaccounting is allowed you can't just use multiple accounts the same day, right?
How is it going to be detected?
like if i play with my brother and my cousin in one room, is it considered multiaccounting?

[south mulch]

i think that labs is going to draw the line at monetary value extracted thru multi accounting like we saw it arena rewards. having twinks, letting friends play on them, this is a situation of no harm no foul to me. but i will try to confirm more thoroughly