[DISCUSSION] BitDAO L1 Infrastructure

1: Cheap gas
2: ETH way gas fee burns Bit
3: Join the ecological chain USDT, USDC… stable currency, cheap gas, attracting people to use.


I also want Ben to have time to talk about this specifically.


Hey all,

I would like to express my support and contribute to R&D/tokenomics of this proposal, some opening comments here:

My suggestion: Two tokens + Roadmap with EVM (ZK-Rollups) and L1 (Sharding) + Compliance

EVM Equivalent

For approved and ongoing projects it is important to maintain a certain compatibility with Ethereum, where most developments have been created and planned.

The choices should aim to balance the Blockchain Trilemma: Security, Scalability and Decentralization.

Main types of scalability for L2:

  • Side Chains
  • Plasma
  • Optimistic Rollups
  • ZK-Rollups

⁃ Use BIT as native token

BIT currently has a design that concentrates two functions: governance and staking, but there is a tokenomics problem that does not allow both functions to operate at the same time, so BIT holders must decide if they want to earn rewards or vote and submit proposals, this decision switching is not healthy for the ecosystem.

When we increase the importance of BIT as a native token of L1, this tokenomics flaw becomes a general critical flaw, because staking native tokens are responsible for ensuring the security of the system, the basis of Game Theory present in POS/DPOS systems depends on a lot of it.


My suggestion is that we have two tokens, a token for the governance of BitDAO and another token for the BIT Protocol (L1 BitDAO), this guarantees the governance, economic and security interests of the protocol.

We can plan a high-performance EVM that meets project requirements in the short to medium term and design a fully independent shard blockchain in the future. If possible, the EVM could be developed with zkrollups in collaboration with zkSync in which we invested $200M USD in the zkDAO proposal. In the meantime, we would do research and development to have our own blockchain for BitDAO.

Other comments:

  1. My suggestion is also effective in the field of regulations, by separating the utility token from the “financial” token, we preserve the autonomy of both areas and can make more specific uses and developments for each of them.
    In the Continent DAO proposal, we decided to create utility NFTs that represent the ownership of the hotspots and separate them from our governance token, so under the law both tokens are different objects.

  2. As @RJ mentioned, 95.89% of BIT tokens belong to the top 10 holders. In L1, this centralization will not be seen well by the industry, for comparison, Ethereum’s top 10 has approximately 24% of the total existing supply.
    So if you decide to create a new token for BitDAO and make BIT the native EVM/Blockchain token, we should think of a way to improve these numbers and decentralization. I previously conclude that it is better to keep BIT as BitDAO’s governance token and a new token for L1’s native token.


It’s good proposal well…


I would love to see BitDAO have its own network.


I will support this proposal


Is it such an issue, to combine both?.. ie., both staking & governance. In fact, it makes more sense, when the voting power attained is a function of tokens staked and time, imo.

100% :+1:



I am a community member at Moledao, a blockchain ecosystem builder. https://twitter.com/moledao_io

Thinking of doing a Twitter space on this topic! Great if we can get Ben or someone from Bitdao to share more on BitDAO’s L1 plan.

Anyone else keen to join? DM me on TG or twitter @defipaca and let’s plan sth!


Good idea, have sent a DM to you on Twitter from the @bitdaoaembassy account :+1:


I don’t agree with some of your points.
“governance and staking, but there is a tokenomics problem that does not allow both functions to operate at the same time”
Maybe you should learn about DOT system,could support both staking and governance at the same time.There are many similar protocols that work this way.I don’t understand why you came to this conclusion? Is there any theoretical basis?

1 Like

As a builder, biggest issues: can we beat Polygon or AVAX on the following?

  • Speed
  • Gas fees
  • Carbon neutral
  • Reputation

Possible, there is always that room for improvement on existing technology.


I’m very excited about this proposal as an L1 would bring a lot of potential not only to the bitDAO ecosystem but also to the entirety of Web3, looking forward to how everything will pan out, and I’m glad we’re moving towards a direction that empowers blockchain tech as a whole and us as community and DAO.


-Very good idea of a layer 1 with BIT as the native token.
-Very good idea of @Piti1936 to start building it on Cosmos SDK to leverage already existing tech.
-I’d suggest that BitDAO funds projects to build Dapps around the use of BIT (and not other projects= other tokens). Dex and lending platform would generate fees that could be shared by BIT hodlers who lock their BIT as suggested by @WhiteHat within these protocols. We should support projects only focus on BIT instead of projects creating another AAA project fork with their own protocol token for governance/locking period
-Projects funded by BitDAO could use this layer 1 to process their transactions thus creating activities and fees. Environment DAO would use it for minting NFTs and to process any transaction.

Do we have a team of experienced developers who could be funded to do this job ?


Welcome Justin, nice to have you around.


I want to believe that’s what this proposal is focusing on, by funding the R&D entity in the foreseeable future and this could open tje door for top-notch developers to help achieve this big dream.


Hey @kravi

Technically it is possible to combine them, but not in the current configuration of BitDAO and using the snapshot that today is the main governance service of Ethereum. But even at L1, the combination of this and concentration on a single token would need to create other mechanisms to prevent tokenomics attacks.

Sushiswap, one of the early adopters of BitDAO, created a token (SushiPowah) for their governance and continues to use the snapshot.


Hey @Norton,

The point you mentioned is not my opinion, it’s a fact, today you can’t staking and using BIT in governance at the same time. The reason is simple, the snapshot reads your token balance (or delegating them), if you have sent your tokens for staking in a smart contract, there are no tokens in your possession for it to identify.

There are several ways to approach this problem. If you better substantiate your disagreement, I can argue with more theoretical and practical elements in my suggestion, including quoting Polkadot.


But don’t you think that creating an L1 blockchain and converting BIT to a currency is against the principles of BitDAO?

BitDAO aims to support builders of the decentralized economy. It is an open platform for proposals that are voted upon by BIT token holders, and is agnostic to chains and projects.

After having your own chain you can’t be chain agnostic anymore, and naturally you’d only support projects that use the BitDAO chain.

Maybe instead of making a chain for BIT you could support L1 projects and in return, you can get significant airdrops for BIT holders in those ecosystems. For example, you support project X which is a layer 1 blockchain and Y is its native currency. When project X launches its mainnet, in the genesis block, they distribute %10 of the total supply of Y between BIT holders. BIT holders can claim their Y by issuing a simple signature at any time. This way, BIT holder can get free tokens in many different blockchains.

though I might be biased since I’m the founder of an L1 blockchain project myself…


To make success. BIT tokens shold be used as gas fees like binance BNB. BIT should make many dapps quickly by investment of BIT DAO treasury. Especially lending protocal, dex, defi, NFT, xTe.


Very good comment.
We may have to cap the % of annual fund allocation to a BIT L1. Like 10-15% max a year dedicated to the BIT L1 ecosystem and 90-85% would be agnostic to chains and projects to grow the ecosystem at large.