[DAO Discussion] Avalanche Liquid Staking Proposal đŸ”ș

Governance DAO Discussion
,
66

90%-10%. 18mo contract to review situation, then porcentages can be tweaked if performed good :smiley:

3 Likes
67

No we would essentially be a Lido competitor on AVAX and FTM. We wouldn’t be deploying our own assets to stake unless we wanted to.

4 Likes
68

I think that this is something that we can look more into. I see alot of folks saying that the 75%/25% is too much, however, this idea was presented by them, and if this idea nets 75% of 125 million that we otherwise wouldnt have had then it’s worth to provide them what they’re asking. With that said, we need someone like Sifu or Dani, someone who has a deep understanding of what is being presented here in order to give an alternative view point. Are there any potential risks with this? Lastly, I dont mind the anonymousness of the folks who are presenting this, however, it would be great if the core guys in Wonderland know who they are. If that’s the case then im comfortable with that. Generally, I think this is a cool proposal, and I’d be willing to see where this goes.

2 Likes
69

As mentioned by most TIME holders.

Info on who are the team members.

75/25 is too much.

1 years contract and DAO voting after.

Love you Frogs.

8 Likes
70

fully support this proposal!

71

People who say 25% is too much, how are you arriving at this conclusion? Not saying I disagree, just I need more info

2 Likes
72

Holy shit this ponzi just got better. LFG

2 Likes
73

Great points - the break clause is also what discourages me the most and the 4 year contract, which seems unrealistic at these early stages of both Wonderland and this new liquid staking platform.

2 Likes
74

I love the idea but the fees and lockup seem a bit prohibitive. Can we get more information on who the team is and some of their past successes?

2 Likes
75

Great idea, first step of many in a move to provide additional value incentive to TIME expanded outside of the ecosystem legos.

1 Like
76

Agree. Great idea, but a 25% cut is way too high given that Wonderland provides the liquidity. 10% should be the ceiling IMHO.

3 Likes
77

If the Tweet comes from Dani, it is because he knows exactly what is best for the DAO and us.

2 Likes
78

  1. Need clarification of “users” and “team”

  2. AVAX does not yet have the smart contract capability to deploy. Shouldn’t we incentivize a contract based on the contingency that AVAX devs can meet that goal first?

  3. Essentially we would be agreeing to a contract, and hope that the AVAX development can meet an expectation
 is it an unrealistic expectation? I won’t pretend to know this answer. However, I don’t pretend to have any unrealistic expectations with any aspect of my life.

“Accept the risk of delay, due to structural changes within AVAX?”

More details on this.

  1. I trust Danny, I’m always ready to be a trendsetter

2 Likes
79

what im curious about is that how would the partnership look like?

  • is the dev team fully doxxed?
  • what prevents from them to just dip w/ the 6m upfront MIM?
    other than that, i support this, however as mentioned above, less % and shorter contract sounds better
    :muscle::frog:
4 Likes
80

Like the idea, but 25% is too much for an initial proposal. Perhaps start with 15-20 and providing you perform receive more later

81

I like the overall direction but I want to recommend a Milestone Payment Plan versus giving the team millions upfront and after it is completed. This will help in derisking our treasury funds and also will act as an incentive for those devs working on our project. I would even extend this to post-completion to allow for the additional compensation to occur if certain milestones are hit such as treasury reaching X amount, number of active users, etc.

5 Likes
82

Well they’ve already started working on the project. And I don’t think we would pay them until it was complete to begin with sometime Q1. So not sure milestones are necessary.

1 Like
83

  1. “Users” would be the “customers” who are staking on our platform. “Team” is the 3rd party dev team that’s working on the platform.

  2. It’s my understanding that smart contracts are not necessary for this to work, but once implemented it would make thing easier.

In the initial version, the subset of operations which cannot yet be managed by smart contracts (such as cross-chain transfers and staking) will be carried out via operations requiring multi-party approval using MPC to ensure security of staked funds. These approaches will then be phased out as the Avalanche blockchain matures.

  1. Not sure what you mean here, but seems related to your #2.
1 Like
84

There’s no way to justify some of the numbers unless we know more about the devs. Nobody hires someone for four years without doing an interview process.

Dani and Sifu have proven themselves to the community. It may be a short history but they are consistent. Anyone else who has the potential to become a future point of failure, needs to make the effort to establish trust and confidence and show they have skin in the game.

Overall though this is a move I am in favor of. Providing liquidity where it doesn’t currently exist is a no-brainer. Great proposal that should continue to evolve.

8 Likes
85

Curious to see the due diligence done on this team by the Wonderland folks and as many have said 75/25 seems a bit high, but it would be helpful to see the terms on similar deals done across the space.

2 Likes