This proposal sounds good to me. I like the idea of having one name and one token for everything. Mantle seems like a cool project that will make it easy for users and developers to use BitDAO products.
I also agree that it’s better to speed up the token distribution and change the old tokens to new ones. This will make things less confusing and risky for us token holders and new buyers.
I’m excited to learn more about the new token features. I hope the community likes this proposal and helps Mantle Network launch successfully.
If the name change improves the ecosystem, then users will appreciate it, regardless of whether they were for or against, and if this is a change for the sake of change, then why is it needed!
I fully agree with this proposal. I think it’s important to have an own token to establish a strong brand and ensure future development and interest in the Mantle network!
I positively see these changes, especially if after these changes Mantle will become the main network. Not everyone can afford to use the ETH network today. In fact, these two tokens are related to each other, and any changes in the price or reputation of one token will automatically be reflected in the other, so the merger will really simplify use and reduce distraction, that is, we will know that we have one asset and follow its development.
We also need clarity on what is the relationship between mantle and bybit? Is mantle the exchange token of bybit just like bnb is to binance? To date I still dont have clarity on tjis relationship.
What is the relationship between bybit and bitdao token. Is bybit just an investor in bitdao? Or is bitdao the official exchange token of bybit? Will mantle become the official exchange token for bybit exchange?
I am fully supportive of this proposal. It delivers the greatest long-term prosperity to token holders, the treasury, as well as the entire ecosystem’s economy, as well as makes the whole narrative much easier to parse.
As a representative of GOLball, we would like to express our strong support for the new BitDAO/Mantle proposal. We believe that the proposed changes have the potential to bring significant benefits to the broader ecosystem.
We appreciate the “One brand, One token” principle, as it simplifies branding and creates a more cohesive ecosystem. The token conversion plan and tokenomic simplification offer greater predictability and transparency in token supply.
Furthermore, the preservation of governance and economic rights for token holders ensures that decision-making remains community-driven.
In conclusion, GOLball wholeheartedly supports the new proposal, and we look forward to a strong partnership and mutual growth in the future.
When I found out about the Bit token, I was deeply convinced that it was a token of the ByBit exchange, since it could be a rebranding, I hope you will not lose the good partnership relations with ByBit, because they were the ones who motivated me to buy the Bit token.
Therefore, there are many people like me, and the token should not become less popular after rebranding.
Managing two brands has significant hard and soft costs and if there is no tangible benefit to doing this, then it makes perfect sense to migrate too and maintain a single brand.
There is of course a significant amount of work involved, not least maintaining communication to the public at large to stop any FUD aimed at the projects. Token conversions are often shaky times because investors want to ensure they maintain a level of ROI during and after the process.
My question relating to this would be, what measures can be taken to ensure the $BIT community feel valued within Mantle, and also how the timings would work to ensure that the brand optimisation is completed when both projects are in a position of strength
In my opinion, this proposal has the potential to be a positive step towards long-term token holder prosperity and the success of core products such as Mantle Network.
By simplifying the branding and tokenomics, the ecosystem may become more accessible and user-friendly, which could in turn increase user and developer engagement and adoption of Web3 technologies.
However, it remains to be seen how the token conversion plan and new token design will be implemented, and whether it will be successful in achieving its intended goals.
Overall, this proposal seems like a reasonable attempt to address the current fragmentation and complexity within the BitDAO ecosystem
The rebranding will be good for mantle. Mantle is going well. It is already having good repo in the people in and outside the ecosystem, I hope it will be acceptable to teams and community and will belaunched soon , but I would like to know the future relationship between mantle and bybit further.
I think that is really a good strategic move. One of the huge problem of today is multitude of chain and organization that operate in the same scope. Unifying the resources can be a win win move, as Mantle can benefit of already well launched DAOto cover for the governance part and have a more simplified and efficient token-economics is key to success. I do fully support this initiative.
How long time do you think this transition will take to be completed and is this in somehow will slow down the Mantle Network roadmap?
simplifying the tokenomics and adopting a “One brand, One token” principle makes it easier for users to understand the relationship between the token and the chain. Instead of having to explain what $BIT is and how it connects to the Mantle ecosystem, users can more easily grasp the value and purpose of the token when it is named after the chain. This can also help with the adoption of the token, as users will have a clearer understanding of the token’s role within the ecosystem.
does that mean Bitdao will no longer exist once this is done?
about the conversion from Bitdao to Mantle coin, will existing Bitdao holders need to do anything manually or all the existing bitdaos will be automatically converted to Mantle?
what happens to the Bitdaos token that are currently used as collateral in crypto loans? Will these collateral be converted to Mantle during the conversion period as well and the loans will continue?