CounterProposal to BASTION: New governance, strategy and controls

In response to Proposal - Bastion Trading / TheSkyhopper to manage or advise on Wonderland Treasury

New improved proposal:

1/ Creation of a risk committee: 4 people elected by the DAO. Eligibility criteria to be defined to filter applications. Specific experiences will be required to insure a mix of Crypto, risk, governance, markets expertise.

Risk committee members can NOT be anon since a high level of accountability will be required.

The risk committee responsibilities:

  • Appoint external service providers to conduct an urgent audit on the DAO (systems, multisig, team, last 72 hours transactions and identification of wallet addresses that benefitted, triggered or amplified the liquidation) and communicate to the community including potential remediations.

  • the right to veto future investment decisions

  • conduct and publish a periodic review of the DAO’s investments and risks.

  • work on a clear and transparent compensation scheme to insure alignement, performance and accountability of the DAO’s management.

—> the risk committee is therefore an independant committee in charge of overseeing the risks taken by the DAO.

2/ Creation of an investment committee: Dani + 3 people elected by the DAO.

—> main role is delivering value to the token holders.

Investment committee is in charge of selecting external investment managers and allocating a portion of the treasury to their strategies.

The crypto world is full of talent, we need a clear and fair process to onboard talents that will benefit our community and create value.

Selection of managers will be based on a clear process documented and communicated to the community and should include among other criteria:

  • Verification of the track record

  • verification of the expertise

  • understanding of the investment strategy and how it will add value to the existing strategies.

BASTION and others can apply to be managers and compete to convince the investment committee to allocate them a PORTION of the treasury to manage.

Why this proposal?

—> we will be building the first DAO with strong and transparent governance and strategy. We will show the world (and the non-coiners) that crypto is not a jungle governed by chaos and that when things go south, the community regroups and comes with a stronger model.

—> we will be diversifying the source of value creation rather than giving the keys of the treasury to one person or team.

—> Dani made mistakes, recognized them and apologized. Like it or not, the guy has good business acumen and ability to build communities. Dani surrounded with experts/performers and an independent risk oversight (risk committee) can deliver something strong.

—> Liquidating Wonderland now will give us at best the current backing value but likely less. Keeping our money aggregated in a 600musd DAO will allow us to invest in strong money management capabilities (onboard the best performers in crypto to manage our money) and give us access to opportunities we wouldn’t get access to individually.

Not necessarily a frog, just a guy trying to make the maximum out of my wmemo like many of us.


A most excellent framework proposed.


Thanks! This is just a framework to be discussed and improved


HI OctOpouS, great proposal. With my background I think I can be a valuable member of the independent committee in charge of overseeing the risks taken by the DAO. Can I share my profile in a DM?


No backing is not a floor price for liquidations, that entire last part is incredible wrong and just as bad an idea as a buy back with out locked staking. Why should everyone in wonderland cover the cost of other peoples bets?
Everything else seems good unless these are paid positions, Let Dani pick his own team.
and now that sifu is Gone this new treasury manager should get a real pay check, like 200k a year, not 5 million a month, wtf was that?


Of course! Plz feel free to reach out in DM

1 Like

There may be a misunderstanding, I have never said backing is a floor. I said if we liquidate wonderland now, at best we ll get the backing, but probably less.

1 Like

This is the part that is going to make people think a buy back will happen and save them from liquidation much like the same thing that happened last time. In the white papers it said each Time was backed by a MIM, everyone thought backing price meant they could use 9’9’ to get rich and then cry scams when they got liquidated.

I acknowledge the potential misunderstanding it may create. I rephrased it.
Thanks for spotting this and contributing!

1 Like

Hi all, read all the above messages regarding Wonderland and yes, it seems to be a chaos right now. One of the ideas mentioned here is to form an investement committee. That’s a good idea, provided it consists of the right mix of people. The same goes for installing a risk committee, that should also consist of a mix of people, not just e.g., traders. On that note, having worked for central banks for almost 20 years, I think I can say that I know something about risk management. My background is in audit, tax and compliance (with the corresponding university degrees completed). Don’t immediately respond with: fuck off, you’re the enemy, not a frog. I have been active in crypto since 2015 so I am not a newbie. Anyway, I am willing to exchange views with some serious people here on how the aforementioned committees could be set up. By then, I have no problem at all sharing who I am, et cetera. I believe in full openness towards the community. What we are unfortunately sharing here at the moment is a common problem and in my opinion we can only solve the problems together.


This is much better than the BASTION proposal.

I have one suggestion, crowd source the investigation into potential candidates by offering a bounty. In the process we will weed out dangerous players and promote the best players to the crypto community before they take up their post.


Excellent idea! I am adding it to the wording.
If only our proposal can get viability to then work out the details further.


I like this idea. I think it is well thought out. I agree that the current treasury value, if invested correctly, can bring value to investors.


Generally, I think that this is a good framework to get this project moving forward. The Bastion proposal should be swiftly rejected on the basis that no performance details have been provided (including, but not limited to investment strategy, allocations, drawdowns, geometric and algorithmic mean returns casted on a month-over-month basis). We’d also need to know what size fund has been managed in the past. We should require that this performance be audited by a firm of our selection.

Regarding your proposal, my only concern is keeping Dani around. At this point, Dani has been either complicit or incompetent and should not be put in charge of a 9-figure treasury. Giving Dani the benefit of the doubt: His decision-making process is questionable at best and is not in the interests of this project.

I think that a strong component of your proposal is the fact that the fund could be managed by multiple parties, each given some amount of the treasury to grow.

Short-term yield strategies could also be employed by our treasury (investments that yield 20-30% annually through a mix of stable/blockchain incentivized coins e.g. AVAX-DAI).

This is a good start. Appreciate your effort.


Thanks Ominous for the detailed reply.
I agree with all your proposals.
On Dani, I think a big portion of the treasury may follow him, he is the one who raised it. Also Transition wise, it s good to avoid a revolution but a smooth evolution. I think he deserves a second chance in a well structured set up that can act quickly if other mistakes are made.
Now we need:
1/ Candidates for the risk committee
2/ Candidates for the investment committee (even from the current team)
3/ Managers: I guess we can at least count Bastion as a potential candidate.


May I also suggest appointing a communications director. One thing that became abundantly for far too few was the change in direction/framework of the organization as we shifted to revenue share model.

Expectations were set for investors with an APY system rather than revenue share model. This created a great deal of issues among the community with regards to sentiment (in a negative way). I believe with proper communication or even voting for that matter, the community can understand WHAT the protocol is doing and HOW it plans to accomplish those things (in laymen’s terms). At the end of the day, everyone wants more $ and this communicator should be familiar with social psychology to some degree (due to the community size).

Furthermore, this should be a frog…truly a frog. Their job isn’t to manage funds or make trades and migrations but speak to others like them. The community wants relate-ability and not a linked in dick swinging contest to be involved. Jon Ray is doing something similar with Jade (who actually ran a social experiment with their investors funds…smrtr) but I believe this could be a lot more effective and immersive into the actual direction of the project.

I propose the director of communications is added to this list and comes from the community.


How are you going to work out paying out investors who buy wmemo now at a price below backing?

1 Like

Thanks for the valuable input.
The list in the proposal relates to the main governance and investment management.
There is a full team that needs to be structured and I am sure the current one has talent including IT, operations and communication.
For communication, we can hire a PR and com specialist with extensive experience in social media, fintech and/or crypto.
Indeed clear communication should be a paramount.


Wonderland has so much potential. We have a 600M treasury to begin with and we’re not even close to the next bull market, that’s too much to wind down and give up, of course we had massive hit, but with hard work we can rebrand and grow again.

1 Like

This is a good idea. I really think that wallets buying a million dollar worth of Wmemo should have there funds automatically locked for 3 months and if they want to sell their position there should be a limit on how much they can sell.

1 Like