Proposal: Fairness Adjustment for Final Presale ($0.05) Participants
Summary
This proposal recommends a retroactive WLFI bonus for wallet addresses that purchased tokens during the final presale round at $0.05, to correct for their significantly higher cost basis compared to early presale participants. A capped, time-locked bonus allocation would acknowledge their late-stage support while preserving supply stability.
Motivation
The WLFI presale was conducted in two distinct pricing tiers:
$0.015 per token for ~20 billion WLFI (Early Presale)
$0.05 per token for ~5 billion WLFI (Final Presale Stage)
Final-round participants paid over 3x the price per token and received fewer tokens per dollar invested, despite their willingness to commit at a more advanced, risk-assessed stage. Many joined under tighter timeframes, with higher price exposure.
To support community alignment, fairness, and long-term credibility, this proposal seeks to recognize and balance the investment positions of $0.05 participants through a modest bonus in WLFI tokens.
Proposed Action
Grant a 30% bonus (capped and time-locked) to wallets that participated in the final WLFI presale round at $0.05.
Details:
Eligibility: Verified wallets that purchased WLFI at $0.05 during the final presale round (snapshot from presale ledger)
Bonus Amount: 30% of tokens purchased at $0.05
Cap: 300,000 WLFI bonus per eligible wallet (to prevent whales from skewing benefit)
Distribution Timing: Within 30 days of proposal passing
Lockup Period: Bonus tokens will be non-transferable for 6 months from the date of distribution
Safeguards
Bonus only applies to wallets still holding at least 50% of their presale WLFI at time of proposal snapshot (to reward long-term holders)
Distribution smart contract will automatically lock tokens for 6 months
Clear list of eligible wallets will be published in advance for community review
Benefits
Equity: Helps normalize entry costs between presale tiers
Loyalty Reward: Recognizes later-stage backers for higher-risk commitment
How would this be fair to people who did not buy the tokens in the pre-sale at $0.05 and have to buy at pre-market for $0.15 - $0.20? This is a capitalist market!
Appreciate your perspective — but I’d like to offer a counterpoint with some context.
Key Difference: Knowledge of Tradability
People buying WLFI at $0.15–$0.20 today already know that WLFI is becoming tradable soon.
They’re entering with:
Clear confirmation that tokens will be liquid
Knowledge of community governance, exchange interest, and token mechanics
Access to price discovery and resale markets
In contrast, buyers at $0.05 had no such clarity:
WLFI was explicitly non-transferable
No guarantees of future liquidity
Greater regulatory and political risk
No certainty that governance would even become community-driven
So yes — $0.15–$0.20 is a higher price, but it’s also lower risk with full visibility.
Meanwhile, $0.05 buyers entered blind, when this was still a semi-closed system.
It’s Not Anti-Capitalist — It Is Risk-Adjusted Fairness
This isn’t about undermining market forces. It’s basic venture logic:
In every startup or token ecosystem, early backers often get bonuses or discounts to compensate for higher uncertainty. That’s not charity — it’s risk-reward balance.
This small bonus proposal (which is also locked for 6 months) simply acknowledges that:
$0.05 buyers paid more than $0.015 buyers
And did so without the benefit of tradability or price support
Summary
$0.05 buyers had no tradability, no liquidity, and took major risk
$0.15+ buyers knew WLFI would be tradeable — that’s a massive value unlock
This bonus is just a small alignment gesture — locked, capped, and limited
Appreciate the debate — discussion like this makes the ecosystem stronger.
I’m completely disagree. If you bought at 0.015, 0.020, or 0.05, it was your decision to enter at that point. Your proposal is as absurd as if those who just bought BTC at six figures were asking for compensation for not having bought at $0.00076 USD per unit in October 2009.
I strongly disagree. The presale is over — those who bought at $0.05 accepted the terms and risk. Missing the early price doesn’t justify a retroactive bonus. If you believe in the project, support it at launch. Early buyers took far more risk at $0.015. No one was forced to buy at $0.05 — that’s not unfair, that’s how presales work.
Yes. Totally agree.
There has to be an arrangement for early buyers.
If that fund is created to reward early buyers, I am okay with them giving the rewards according to the buying line.
You’re right, in any open market, traders make their own decisions.
But in the case of WLFI, the situation was fundamentally different during the $0.05 round.
There were no clear guarantees of tradability, no open exchange plans. Unlike BTC or other tokens that were tradeable from day one, WLFI buyers at $0.05 entered with far less certainty and higher risk.
So this isn’t about changing the rules after the fact — it’s about acknowledging a unique situation and proposing a fair, time-locked adjustment to reflect that reality.
Personally I bought 0.015 and 0.05. why the price was increased? Who approved 0.05? If it’s community/governance token then we should have voted for any price increase through votes. Once it’s trading at open market that’s completely different and that’s where your argument will make sense. Thank you for the input.
You want to reward those who waited until the second round and FOMO’d in when given the opportunity at a higher price.
Round 1 buyers mainly purchased prior to the election, before Trump won, and before he was inaugurated. Round 2 buyers bought in after the $TRUMP token was released and pumped.
No point in any bonus for round 2, in my opinion. Their fault their conviction was not high enough .
Imo of round 2 buyers will be paper hands, anyway.
Proposal: Fairness Adjustment for Final Presale ($0.05) Participants
Summary
Motivation
Proposed Action
Details:
Safeguards
Benefits
Call for Discussion
Key Difference: Knowledge of Tradability
.