Yet, anyone can go out there and try to bring in utility.
I know there’s folks on Twitter promoting their payment SDK for LUNC. Independent work to make the chain transactions faster.
“A sales team” could be you even. L1 was not contracted for marketing work.
Community chain - perhaps Community should get more involved.
Correct. This is one of the reasons I decided to put up an alternate spending prop for Q2 that cuts off Tobias and removes pointless “managers” who get paid $7000/month to oversee 3 developers. What’s happening here is the LUNC community will be taxed - we’ll pay for the L1 team, which will then work on Tobias’s and Ed’s side-projects. It’s basically a stealth tax; sure, we’re not directly funding these side projects, but we may as well be.
It’s disgusting and disingenuous to the extreme that they’re lying to the community like this. No one bought into LUNC to fund Tobias’s pet projects (Senta, Dojo, Operator) nor Ed’s AI chain. In case of the latter, I do wish @ek826 luck with it, I honestly do, but like I’ve mentioned in a couple other places he needs to bootstrap this on his own without piggybacking off LUNC’s liquidity and developers. If it pans out, then great, we all win, but the risk is not for the LUNC community to shoulder!
Tobias himself has gone completely off the rails and acts like he’s King of LUNC while the rest of us are here to fall into step and fund whatever flavor of the month idea he comes up with. “Coding Dojo”? Really? $13,000/month for the guy to write a glorified wiki?
This entire situation is getting out of hand, especially given how Q1 wasn’t all that stellar to begin with.
look at what happens when the “community” gets more involved - any and all proposals get spammed with FUD and no decent solutions are ever offered. direct democracy is good on paper, not in practice.
Actually, we have more content now:
Forgot to mention that we need to sort out our priorities as investors. He mentioned that.
Thats the problem of being running “the definitive coin” but when it gets to payments they ask for dolars no matter what the price of Lunc is… Shouldn´t they be paid with a fix amount of Lunc instead? You will see how fast the price rises…
Actually you do have a point…
I do not represent TGF in any way. As a community member, I was speaking to things that I thought may be important, and common sense questions to ask. There is no one individual in this community that has the ability to be a spokesperson for the whole community at this time, and I do not wish to be that. If there was any impression that I am somehow a spokesperson for TGF, please accept my apology and understand that I am not.
Mr. Andersen’s dismissal of your legitimate and sincere question is yet another example of his unprofessionalism. We cannot tolerate this kind of attitude from someone who claims to be a community leader.
I would like to suggest a few potential changes/opinions
I am not a dev and do not work kn a technical enviroment so i have used my judgment from my own experience - this would hopefully keep peace in the community and with hopes to continue growing and getting in more talent while not draining funding on things that i see as non essentials (i could be wrong)
The L1 Task Force Q2 development team could benefit expanding to include another fully trained dev (bilbo as suggested on Rabbis alternative paper if we are able to test his ability ) i believe the developers should be able to manage themselves and with Tobias being the only full time dev he could share the work goals out so it runs smoothly.
Due to being on the tight budget we have we could have 2 or 3 community volunteers (not paid) to answer questions and liaise with L1instwad of spending money on a project manager at this point in time when the budget is diminishing.
a suggestion of how this would be done is for if any of the community have a question that would like answering they would email and on a weekly basis an article will be posted that will answer these questions. This would mean that the community have a place to read questions and answers being asked in an organised manner.
Once a month the community liaison volunteers will organise an AMA that would include the L1 team. Applicants can apply
Also in regards to this
• Finalize L1 Dojo - Path of the Expert should this be in the development scope as a paid project? – is it a necessity? is there not something else that can be worked on in this time that benefits the blockchain more substantially at this pivotal point?
Could we potentially look into a way to stake ustc or use this time for something more important?
2x junior dev roles may no longer be needed as we would of added a fully functioning developer, although if these roles still exist maybe it should be on an apprentice level where they were progress to paid roles at a certain point?
i would also add in a clause - maybe if i search my own work handbook along the lines of
while contracted to work on the chain
all workers must remain professional in the work place and in public/on social media.
As the faces of the lunc blockchain all contracted workers should act professionally - this means no confrontational posts, singling out other people in or out of the community etc (obviously this bit would need working on)
We need a code of conduct for the faces representing the chain
Thats simple, The study about price prediction can be done based on utility and volumes then, lets say a fair price target can be set and payment could be done according to this price target.
The price goes beyond… Bull eye!
The price goes below… We all loose temporary
This is just an example, Im quite sure this idea can be developed in something really good for all the involved people.
Without devs there is no chain but without people buying the coins there is no project either as funding is vital for the sustainability of the ecosystem.
I don’t know… Give it a loop
please considerer the error on this paragraph:
what i mean was:
The devs should recieve a small amount of money to do their work plus performance based compensation after that. Then the work can be put out for competitive bids. Deliverables shuld be clear as a bell and no payment until delivered. Performance based means price of LUNC, on chain volume, number of apps/Dapps running on chain, burn rate. They should also get bonuses for exceeding quarterly goals. Nothing new here many businesss and contracts run this way. There is a big disconnect because the devs want to perform a service and the LUNC owners want results/outcome, not a service.
Mark M Forexearlywarning, looking to build forex apps on the blockchain !
Tobias just does whatever the hell he wants, it’s not like anyone has oversight on him. I very much doubt he puts in 8h working on LUNC every day - he spends at least 3-4h a day shitposting on Twitter. IMHO he holds down a regular IRL job while scamming LUNC money on the side and lying to everyone - nothing else can explain the low amount of actual programming work he’s done. Dude probably offloads the majority of his LUNC work list onto the other 3 devs.
But I gotta hand it to him, guy knows how to hustle! He’s managed to convince everyone that he’s worth $13k/month despite doing jack shit. 
@LuncBurnArmy can you answer Nova’s question? Please provide a list of completed work so we can compare it to the Q1 roadmap laid out in the original spending proposal.
Thanks!
There is one way to confirm that, though I know that Z won’t use this.
I had used this at office. The issue with this app is that you can’t shut it off and it records the app and window title of the app automatically. At least I do not think there is any way to cheat this app. This is the best time tracking app that there is.
I would agree to funding this team if this team uses this app and Z tracks 8 hours on this every day.
Though I suspect that we will probably not find anyone alive from the team the next day if we force this upon them.
Maybe they will return tokens to CP? Where results of work - useless few-page site?
Thanks for raising this point again, Rabbi. I would love to hear some clarification from @LuncBurnArmy on this question I’ve raised as well.
TGF is a separate organization from the L1 Task Force and any questions or comments related to them should be sent to them directly as this is an L1 Task Force proposal.
Please find the following summary of work completed for Q1. I am in the process of preparing an end of quarter report, and there are some items that will be included in that report that are not listed here which have also been completed. These additional items include components such as security patches, new feature requests that were approved through governance (i.e. minimum initial deposit for proposals to eliminate scam proposals) and the Cosmwasm v1.1.0 upgrade which was originally required to have an investigation conducted, but has now largely been completed.
I will also provide a separate summary of the other items that have been completed, as mentioned above.
Quarter 1
January, 2023
Establish process and product backlog for L1 team. Completed
Establish a “community oversight committee” for this L1 team, with trusted third parties. (PFC, DJTrev, StrathCole) Completed
Assess the possibility of introducing upgrade handlers to utilize software upgrade governance proposals. Completed
Assess the state of our current “version map” and determine how it can be patched to reflect the current state of our system. Completed
Continue working on the “genesis import” problem to maintain a “fallback strategy” if “version map” cannot be patched. Completed
Adjust ante handler to send 50% of “burn tax” to community pool & 50% to treasury burn wallet. Completed
Test/Upgrade “estimate-fee” client logic (LCD) in auth module to ensure “burn tax” is calculated correctly. Completed
Test/Upgrade IBC denom whitelist. Completed
Propose governance for no canonical github repo. Agora has been posted
Test, push, and upgrade testnet with version 1.0.5 Completed
Test, push, and upgrade mainnet with version 1.0.5 Completed
February, 2023
Investigate PebbleDB/BadgerDb for speed improvements to the backend, discontinue support for goleveldb/rocksdb Completed. See GitHub - classic-terra/db-benchmark for benchmarking and performance information.
Transition to iavl fast node via iavl 0.19.4. Deferred
Implement upgrade handlers to utilize software upgrade governance proposals. Completed
Assess the viability of using cosmovisor for future chain upgrades. Completed
Test upgraded chain to Cosmos SDK v0.45.11 with TFL patches to support oracle. Completed
Test upgraded chain to Tendermint v0.34.21 with TFL patches to support oracle. Completed
Work closely with infrastructure* and L2 wallet providers/partners* on the Classic chain to ensure compatibility with Cosmos 45.11 and Tendermint v0.34.21. Completed
Propose governance for Mev-Tendermint. Not required
Test, push, and upgrade testnet with version 2.0.4 (Modified release to v2.0.0 name) Larger testnet validator set required
Test, push, and upgrade mainnet with version 2.0.4 (Modified release to v2.0.0 name) Targeted for 3rd or 4th week of April.
March, 2023
Investigate updating to canonical version of Tendermint v0.37. Completed
Ensure the priority and compatibility with Oracle transactions (tx) compared to other tx’s once we adopt Tendermint v0.37. Completed
Secure and deploy Oracle with sha256 to all validators. Pending governance approval. Agora proposal has been posted.
Fork TFL Interchain wallet, develop potential solutions to the bech32 problem at the wallet level, and present multiple solutions to TFL.* ** No longer required
Impact analysis of upgrade to Cosmwasm v1.0.0 to assess effect on migrating L2 wasm contracts from 0.16.6. Completed
Augment the current WASM virtual machine to fit with Cosmwasm v1.0.0. Completed
Reach out to Assaf from Secret Network to understand dual VM setup. No longer required.
Conclusions of quarter 1. Community assessment of team activities. Governance vote to continue funding team activities. In progress
@LuncBurnArmy thanks for the response. Some follow up questions:
Propose governance for no canonical github repo. Agora has been posted
What is the reason for this not being posted back in January and was only just posted now?
Investigate PebbleDB/BadgerDb for speed improvements to the backend, discontinue support for goleveldb/rocksdb Completed . See GitHub - classic-terra/db-benchmark for benchmarking and performance information.
I can see that the repo exists, but where is the benchmarking and performance information in this repo?
Transition to iavl fast node via iavl 0.19.4. Deferred
Can you expand on why this was deferred?
Propose governance for Mev-Tendermint. Not required
Can you expand on why this task was no longer required?
Test, push, and upgrade testnet with version 2.0.4 (Modified release to v2.0.0 name) Larger testnet validator set required
Fair enough. I know this is already a task item that is being worked on, and we’ve had discussions about this specific requirement in the past.
Secure and deploy Oracle with sha256 to all validators. Pending governance approval. Agora proposal has been posted.
Can you expand on why this Agora was only posted now?
Fork TFL Interchain wallet, develop potential solutions to the bech32 problem at the wallet level, and present multiple solutions to TFL.* ** No longer required
Can you expand on why this is no longer required?
Reach out to Assaf from Secret Network to understand dual VM setup. No longer required.
Can you expand on why this is no longer required?