Advantages of Issuing $JUSTICE Tokens to Petition Signers
| Dimension | $JUSTICE Token Rewards | NFT Badges |
|---|---|---|
| Utility | Fungible and usable across DAO governance, apps (e.g. Freedom Wall, Journal Chain), staking or voting | Non-fungible, symbolic only unless a separate system gives it utility |
| Immediate value | Has existing liquidity on exchanges (MEXC, Bitfinex), can be traded or accumulated | May have no secondary market unless explicitly supported |
| On-chain governance | $JUSTICE directly grants voting power in Snapshot proposals or future on-chain votes | NFTs do not confer governance rights by default |
| Scalability & Cost | Easier and cheaper to distribute to thousands of wallets via batch transfer or Merkle airdrops | Minting thousands of NFTs increases gas and storage costs significantly |
| Incentive model | Can gamify ongoing participation — e.g., rewards for signatures, referrals, social sharing | Requires separate gamification logic or platform |
| Symbolic impact | Still conveys support, but also serves as a stake in the DAO’s future | Stronger as a badge of honor or digital collectible |
| DAO Treasury alignment | Token rewards can be drawn from pre-allocated incentive pools, and recycled via usage fees | NFTs, if free, don’t recycle value; if paid, may deter signers |
When NFTs May Be More Appropriate
- As commemorative mementos (“I was signer #8,345 of the Assange Petition”)
- As public-facing identity badges (e.g., integrated into social profiles or DAO reputation systems)
- If designed as part of a gamified badge or rank system
Best Practice: Combine Both
- Issue $JUSTICE tokens as functional incentives
- Optional NFT minting for symbolic expression and social sharing
Example:
A user signs the petition → gets 100 $JUSTICE + option to mint a limited “#FreeAssange signer” NFT.