Tokens devoted to future charitable causes

One of the original core principles of Pink Panda - and carrying over to Bamboo - is giving back to charities. To this end, we had split 2 wallets for the following purposes:

  1. Dev/General treasury - for development, administrative, software licensing, etc.
  2. Charity/airdrops/marketing

We continued that separation post migration, but would like to formalize what will be “locked” into a separate Charity wallet going forward. This wallet would be multi-sig and governed via its own rules the DAO would create in conjunction with guidance from Bamboo and the social good advisory board. Almost a mini-DAO. Ideally enough to last many years ahead of us.

One of the first proposals we’d want to settle on would be “how much”. In my opinion, 50% of the wallet should be the minimum. Perhaps as high as even 90%, but I think we still want to retain funds for use for airdrop/marketing proposals. The wallet currently contains approximately 6.8 Million tokens.



I think this is another good step forward for getting more holders to engage. A reservation of 50% would establish a $66k charitable fund at current prices. I think 50% at this current rate would be enough to allow the DAO to donate $1k-$2k/mo at this current time without negatively impacting the longevity of the fund.


50-60% sounds good to me, like Josh said it would allow sustainable donations going forward.

I like the mini-DAO concept for governance over it

Anywhere from 50%-65% would seem good to me.

1 Like

For clarification

“Split two wallets”, would mean two wallets were created originally?

Wallet two, ( charity, airdrops, marketing ), will be split to create a third wallet.)?

Third wallet could contain between 50 to 90 percent, and remainder, between 50 and 10 percent, will remain in airdrops and marketing wallet.

If this is correct, 50/50 seems the most balanced, and 65/35 would be great. 90 percent is a very interesting idea.

So 65 percent might be the sweet spot.


This is dependent on if I have really understood the wallets, or article for that matter.

Very interested in seeing if I understood it properly, and would welcome clarification from any source.

Feel free to get a laugh off poor comprehension skills, if I am way off.


Your understanding is correct.

IMO 50% is enough at the moment. In order to have more funds in the future it’s only necessary to increase holders so some funds for airdrops/marketing are a must.

1 Like

Definitely a very strong argument.

Very balanced

50 :balance_scale: 50

1 Like

One thing I neglected to mention is that we also have a SIGNIFICANT pool of tokens that came over from migration that are very unlikely to be migrated. I think of them as “unredeemed gift cards”. This happens a ton in retail - folks forget they have gift cards, and they sit as a liability on a company’s balance sheet, until eventually recognized as revenue depending on state/accounting requirements.

Over time - my opinion is that this “unclaimed tokens” pool should be utilized, and this would be fantastic for burns/airdrops/staking incentives. We can also “hedge” this with the treasury wallet #1 over time.


Very relieved that this liability has been spotted, and that plans will be put into place to turn this liability into an asset.

Probably the best news I have seen in ages.

Thank you for sharing this critical finding.

1 Like

50-50 sounds well-reasoned given current BAM price and sustainability going forward.

1 Like

50/50 sounds like a good split to me.

50/50 sounds good to me!

Like others, I feel 50/50 is reasonable.