Why is Stader getting so much ‘emergency funding’ when they did a $20m CoinList raise? They’ll have access to a healthy chunk of the main 9.5% budget anyway - shouldn’t they be removed from the 0.5% equation entirely? They’re not in dire straits.
4 Likes
Why does Stader get so much? and White Whale, so little? These allocation’s have all gone crazy.
and who actually picked these as the council? (Eligibility and allocations would be determined by a council consisting of longstanding Terra community members, Karma, Panterra0x, Cephii, Seb, and GJ). Please disclose what do you benefit out of this? Every monetary/non-monetary benefit needs to be disclosed. If anyone from the council has “friends, cousins” or any other affiliation to the projects that are getting allocation, needs to disclose these right now.
2 Likes
Proposal to rebalance the allocation between bucket 2 and 3.
Current:
PMF projects
- 9 projects
- 1M Luna
- 20% of no-TVL receives 40%
No PMF projects
- 40 projects
- 1.5M Luna
- 80% of no-TVL receives 60%
Change to:
PMF projects
- 9 projects
- 0.5M Luna
- 20% of no-TVL receives 20%
No PMF projects
- 40 projects
- 2M Luna
- 80% of no-TVL receives 80%
This would better account for teams in the no-PMF group which in actuality did have a Product Market Fit and require runway.
It guarantees the no-PMF group
- a minimum of 50,000 Luna IF all were to be split equal
- more wiggle room for allocations according to runway requirements
While still guaranteeing the PMF group
- a minimum of 55,555 Luna IF all were to be split equal
Alternatively, 0.5M Luna to be added to the no-PMF bucket could be taken from the TVL bucket, considering TVL projects have a very strong advantage in the remaining 9.5% of the Builders’ Allocation.
Otherwise, this might find more consensus:
Proposal to rebalance the allocation between bucket 2 and 3.
Current:
PMF projects
- 9 projects
- 1M Luna
- 20% of no-TVL receives 40%
No PMF projects
- 40 projects
- 1.5M Luna
- 80% of no-TVL receives 60%
Change to:
PMF projects
- 9 projects
- 0.75M Luna
- 20% of no-TVL receives 30%
No PMF projects
- 40 projects
- 1.75M Luna
- 80% of no-TVL receives 70%
This would better account for teams in the no-PMF group which in actuality did have a Product Market Fit and require runway.
It guarantees the no-PMF group
- a minimum of 43,750 Luna IF all were to be split equal
- more wiggle room for allocations according to runway requirements
While still guaranteeing the PMF group
- a minimum of 83,333 Luna IF all were to be split equal
Alternatively, 0.5M Luna to be added to the no-PMF bucket could be taken from the TVL bucket, considering TVL projects have a very strong advantage in the remaining 9.5% of the Builders’ Allocation.
Thats still a bribe/ compensation if there is no mention of operational costs, so i think firstly it needs to be said, is this funding for that purpose or is it an actual runaway fund. Cause nothing discussed is so far as such. Like cool, if your bribing these builders to stay atleast say it.
This is not good time to discuss this issue.
TFL have to spend thier time for reimbursing ust and lp holders who could not get ghe airdrops during the genesis block. This must be the first.
Hey, Arbie dev here (See ArbieApp on Twitter)
As of May, Arbie was used by 25,000 LUNAtics, of which were performing over 500,000 requests per month. From a January 2022 launch, each month saw exponential growth.
Not just a Telegram Arb Bot; Arbie’s several features/integrations are listed below.
Features
- Price data, kindly provided by Terrascope
- 50+ arb pairs across 4 Dex - Astroport, TerraSwap, PRISM and LOOP🪦
- Live exchange rates
- Staking APR’s
- Liquidity Pool APR’s
Alerts
- Wallet activity
- Arbs
- Price (Tokens, Pairs and mAsset)
- Liquidation Bid Fills
- Anchor Borrow
- Mars Borrowing
- Mars LTV
- Edge Risk Ratio
Due to launch was NFT Tracking Alerts and NFT Sniper Alerts - Full Roadmap was made publicly available (I can’t post link to it, sorry)
Arbie was self funded and offered to the community free. The reception was unprecedented and to keep the service running was reliant on donations to access premium features - namely Wallet Alerts, Mars and Edge Alerts.
Arbie received donations in UST and was therefore peg rekt also. I propose Arbie should be entitled to a small amount of the allocation to continue to serve the community and build upon his 25,000 strong user base.
Thank you
4 Likes
Those members of the Council are not receiving any monetary or non monetary benefit, they have formed this council out of pure necessity and have recused themselves from weighing in on decisions that affect them.
Karma is on the GP and illiquidly team, both of which have asked for minimum support, they will not receive any favouritism from the council, nor are we asking for any. She has recused herself from any input on these projects.
Totally in support of ArbieApp receiving an allocation. My most used ‘dapp’ in the ecosystem.
@Arbie - if this fails, I’m sure you could receive some runway by selling a share of your future subscription revenue to equity holders (in the form of a token, e.g. $ARBIE). I know I’d invest.
3 Likes
Also agree on Arbie support – Had discussed possible investment in the project, was deemed “no value add”, and hope to make it up here!
Agree with launching a SaaS type model through tokens.
1 Like