Plan to retire or sunset unused coins

As more and more creators join Rally, it is inevitable that some of them will find Rally was not what they were expecting, or find that it does not work for their context, or fail to engage their community, or simply lose interest. In order to honor the creators who are actively engaging with their coin, we will need a strategy for retiring these coins. This will become especially important once creating new coins becomes more automated.

Key concerns:

  • Sunset should be automated but interruptible. I.e., the process of cleaning up coins should be passive and happen in the background, but should provide ample time and warning such that creators can easily interrupt the process
  • What to do with the existing coins that are held? What is the impact of that on the rest of the system?

I will attempt to update the above list with any additional concerns from the thread.

1 Like

I believe the new Creator Council will address some of the issues you have stated. This seems to be the second phase of the Council.


Council will review Creator Coin candidates. In the future, scope may include reviewing previously approved creators.

Hope this helps


Are you saying that the Creator Council will manually monitor all the coins? And manually handle any sunsets they think might qualify?

we many review approved creators … that are struggling but as a community member I would like to see those that are struggling given some marketing advice from the rally team before we decide to pull the plug. As you stated pulling the plug can be challenging and something that I don’t believe there is a process in place. This stage of the game this is prob the last thing on the Core teams timeline but you do bring up great points

1 Like

This is an important topic. I get the desire to retire unused coins; but remember, the fan that bought that coin to support their creator has real value that is in the fan’s wallet, not the creator’s wallet.

We certainly want to turn off network rewards for these creators and communities and potentially remove them from the ‘front page directory’, but it’d be another thing altogether to just remove the coin from existence and take away from the fans or anyone else that is holding their coins still.

Good thread, I look forward to the discussion here

Though I agree that the Council and Rally should evaluate communities and creators with less active coins and especially provide more support for those who are committed to the success of their coin, have you considered having community devs use these inactive coins for development purposes?

In previous community dev calls, community developers expressed the need to have Rally creator coins for development testing.

I think we need to look at the pros and cons here. There maybe fundamental reasons why some creators are not achieving success vs others. There might be some amazing things they already do but in the “crypto space” it might not be 100% transferable. I cannot speak for the team but I am guessing that a deep dive has not been done here. The cons might include bitter feelings and negative press but also we owe it to ourselves to try and help. Our goal is to make rally stronger, so maybe we need to some how give a lending hand or advisement/pointers to struggling creators before we end the relationship…

In any good business you need a plan. You need to have a time line and goals. In the future, when someone applies for a coin, should we ask for a 1yr - 5yr business plan? I am always a believer in having some metric to measure success. Some creators might have a slow roll, others might want to hit the ground running . There is no one solution that can help all creators equally; as they are all from different parts of the world, have different agendas and different followers. On Rally’s side of things it would be nice if we do have some layout of what we are looking for in the same time frames. This will allow us to then have another metric to hold to the creator responsible. Some of this could entail bonuses for hitting certain goals by certain dates.

Right now I would rather look at the pros and try offer a lending hand to mitigate the cons until we reach some mile stone and have some data on test cases.