Agree with Professor’s proposal. This is what we need.
2 Likes
Agreed with the professor! Let’s move forward with his ideas.
5 Likes
Yes because that’s what made Wonderland now because most of the people here hurt them pusy and panicked like bitches and sold in 95% loss now hey Time is up, Wmemo is up so what’s up bitches still your pusy hurts ? I bet ya does still sore as whomever was smarty and bought at 200 hey is happy now.
So why do you want to kill rebases and Apy?
I tell you why? Because you like to take it from behind and you don’t like money.
If you have enough blood in your dick well you take the risk I’m here for making my Time in one year or two OK? Then trade my time and then make my buck.
Of course if you didn’t trade shit you’ll never understand how market goes you’ll cry and sustain the Professor and Wonderland 2shite and you forget that the team work their buts off that Danielle is nearly burnt its fuckin brain off and poor guy is a fuckin mess now. It will be OK but not because I’m fan of Danielle mistakes I say so but because you don’t see that whales still laughing at us making us believe that if we scrap the best of Wonderland well what we going to get instead? A big fuck all.
1.Do not screw with the Apy and rebases did Pancake swap said that they initial huge Apy was bad? Fuck no where are they now? On fuckin top
Did Cro said that the Apy is bad? Fuck ain’t yes you can reduce it when Price grows and supply gets down makes sense.
Burning mechanisms is all Wonderland needs nothing more.
Increase security on the app when enter app connect a yubico key, a 2fa and a password assure safe environment before connecting your wallet, hackers are there.
You need only adding 2 things and that’s it.
2 Likes
No the Professor plan isn’t ideal not at the point he wants to scrap Time and Wmemo not when Wmemo is down from ATH. Now recovered and Time as well Time does better.
The professor did not mention anything about the actual Time listings in Gate.io and Hotbit. It was a lot of work to bring Time on those exchanges and we need more listings and even Coinbase. Spell is already there what impede us thinking that Time wouldn’t be possible to be listed on Coinbase or Binance. Zhao criteria of listing is the use of token and community so how many people and how strong a community is and increased number of holders combined with trading volume performance make a Binance listing.
Listen Zhao not shady hedge fund hedgehog Professor.
I agree with the Audit should begin to propose an audit company that audited in the past well knows Companies.
Let the market sort things naturally. Yes we can have collaborations we can implement few changes from the Professor we could as well collaborate with Bastion trade but in conditions that no one takes over the treasury.
Keep the Apy and rebases as this gives incentive to invest, buy, trade etc.
Thus far no proposal convinced me at all or perhaps in few points of Professor and Bastion trade except that they want to take over a part of treasury or all treasury. Fuck ain’t that happening. From the beginning
1.Treasury is our propriety.
No one absolutely fuckin no one Professor, Bastion trade others ain’t taking over the treasury. This is our Property. Investors propriety company including treasury, assets, type of assets, brand, profits etc.
I agree to add profit shares on top of Apy and rebates as long you hold over 1 year.
Introducing Avax and phantom liquidity pools on Wonderland.
Burn Time and Wmemo against profit share.
Burn Time when you unstake before termen.
Burn all Time and Wmemo of all who wants out
Burn Time and Wmemo that’s in treasury and is not circulate put that liquidity on Avax and Phantom pools.
Do this instead.
No I don’t want to hire the professor not until
We know who is?
We verify its past and references
Demonstrate previous success in Crypto projects
He will make his proposals publicly on YouTube revealing his identity, name and verifying its identity
Then we can talk. However he don’t need to scrap the Apy and rebases we taking crypto not stocks.
Please read this feedback carefully.
1 Like
Yes this makes more sense.
Sustainable Roi in business let the numbers speak before words.
If you want to remove Apy and rebases you need something better and sustainable proven.
If not don’t move it let it be as the market regulate this naturally.
What grows goes down
What’s down goes up.
That’s Apy for to give us crypto to trade with and from here you make your bucks OK
I had enough of this bitchy cry oh not the rebase, dilution and? Trade then. Whomever bought at under 200 Time now is got its investment X2.
So please consider this points as well before really moving forward.
2 Likes
Hi everyone, the discussion in Discord made me realize for the Professor’s Proposal to go anywhere that it needs to be outlined as steps to take. To that end, the below includes my understanding of The Professor’s article in step-by-step form. I’ve also shared this same explanation as part of my own post to try and steer this discussion towards an RFT post so that we can get this voted on! See here: The Professor's Article: Steps Forward
Scrap wMEMO and replace it with only one token
The benefits of rebranding the current tokenomics of WL into one token is twofold:
- We remove confusion surrounding the greater crypto-community’s understanding of TIME, MEMO, wMEMO, etc.
- The frogs are moving forward with a new vision for WL and a new token will wipe the slate clean and effectively remove our old, bad MEMOries. It may seem like a small thing, but I seriously propose that Dani come up with the name for this new token. He is the idea man and a huge proponent of the success of this project and the community, so having his creativity be part of this is important.
Scrap APY and institute a robust, well organized Revenue Share model –
I fell for the 80,000% APY gimmick when I first heard of Olympus and WL, and, putting all the considerations of the interplay between APY, market cap, and dilution aside for now, I think our next steps forward need to be about clarity and consistency in how WL, management, and the treasury is seen by the frogs and potential investors.
The crazy huge APY is an incredibly useful tool to bring in new investors, but I don’t believe it is needed anymore. WL has already proved itself as one of the most successful DAOs of all time with a massive treasury and supportive community. Moving towards a Revenue Share model will benefit current frogs and future investors, and with the right limitations and dedicated Revenue Share percentage from the treasury to token holders we can see profit from our investment in WL while simultaneously increasing price pressure due to a maximum supply of tokens.
The specific steps of this part of the proposal include:
- Bring APY to 0%.
- Dedicate only a portion of the monthly earnings to yield farming activities to token holders as revenue share on a monthly basis.
a. The Professor suggests 20% as the portion dedicated to revenue share, but I believe this amount should be decided by the DAO.
b. The Professor suggest the revenue share should be paid out in a stablecoin, and I believe that MIM is the perfect option that will also support circulating the supply within the WL and Abracadabra framework, whether or not the DAO decides to keep the two protocols separate (discussed below). - Invest the remaining portion of monthly earnings into growing the treasury and future VC investments.
- Have a Revenue Share qualification requirement where you must hold your tokens for at least 30 days to participate in the revenue share.
a. This reduces selling pressure and provides less opportunities for price manipulation. - As part of removing APY and rebases, have a maximum supply of tokens in circulation to build price pressure.
Management Structure
I would definitely read this portion of The Professor’s post to understand how sincerely he believes Dani to be the creative mind and driver behind WL, but the basic steps of this part include:
- Keep Dani on as the Chief Strategy Officer (CSO) so that he can focus on the big picture ideas and continue doing the things that helped build WL while not having to worry about the day-to-day management of the Treasury.
- Bring in a Chief Operating Officer (COO) to be the engine of the project who is responsible for the day-to-day operations, including managing the rest of the team, investor relations, PR, social channels, reviewing and updating SOPs, maintaining quality control and risk management, and vetting external contractors and developers.
a. The COO does not need to be doxed to the public because they would be handling treasury keys, and their identity only needs to be known to the core team. Though we all understand people’s hesitancy with the Sifu fiasco, we have to understand that this position is one that needs to maintain high levels of security, both for themselves and for the project so that outside forces cannot manipulate the treasury or take advantage of the project. - Bring in a Chief Financial Officer (CFO) to manage the treasury with an additional two (2) individuals to act as multi-sigs to execute transactions.
a. Create disaster relief protocols in the case of emergencies or sudden death.
b. The Professor suggests that these individuals be well known to the WL community and greater Defi community to re-instill trust in the project.
c. Have Dani act as interim manager of the treasury until these positions can be filled. - Bring in a full time Chief Technology Officer (CTO) to manage backend development and any external third party contractors.
- Bring in an Investment Director or experienced M&A consultant to handle and hunt down investments for the protocol.
a. Additionally - Build a portal for the WL community to submit investment proposals to leverage our community for scouting opportunities. - Bring in experienced yield farming consultants to help create innovative ideas for new profitable farms for the protocol to create.
a. Additionally – Build a portal for the WL community to contribute ideas to the team.
b. Note – The Professor includes the possibility of an algorithmic liquidation protecting yield optimizer, which would essentially help WL to leverage on any farm and reducing or completely eliminating the risk of liquidation. I would give that section a read as well. - Bring in an experienced Communications Director/Risk Manager to handle all Social Channels (Discord, Twitter, etc.) and public relations with the possibility of periodic AMAs with this director and Dani to keep up community engagement.
Allow a Rage Quit solution
This is the hot-button issue for a lot of people in the community right now, and we all understand the potential risks with allowing this option. However, putting emotions aside this option needs to be seriously considered and voted upon to help bring the community back together. Importantly, we need to provide this option without allowing for those who quit to simply rejoin and take advantage of the arbitrage at the detriment to those frogs who hodl. The steps here include:
- Shut down the LP and all trading of wMEMO/MIM for a set period of time (The Professor suggests 48 hours) to allow those people that want to exit to claim their party of the Treasury.
- Prior to opening the LP, burn all tokens from those who exercised the option to rage quit in addition to any DAO tokens to bring the market price up to a set percentage point above backing (The Professor suggests 20%).
- Create an automated bot/procedure to defend thet backing price at exactly the backing price, so that price manipulators cannot take advantage of manual rebuys that occur below backing.
- Phase out buybacks to help sustain the longevity of the protocol.
Reminder here, these steps included are simply recommendations. Some of the steps should be included together, but nothing is stopping the DAO from having individual votes on some of these steps to allow the community to decide
Monthly Audits, Treasury Dashboard and Backing Price
Again, this part of The Professor’s post that I highly recommend reading yourself, but the basic steps include:
- Incorporate periodic audits of the Treasury by an external blockchain auditor (The Professor suggest monthly, but recognizes this will be difficult considering WL is a DAO).
- Build a specialized dashboard to show the following Treasury balances and positions, as well as current profit/loss with the possibility of additional sections to the dashboard including:
a. Assets Held
b. LP Positions
c. Farming Strategies
d. VC investments
Backing Price
The current backing price and Treasury Balance in WL includes the value of the native token (TIME, wMEMO) held in the Treasury, and in the case of an actual bank run on the project where backing price would become essential to recoup our investments thee value of those tokens would be ZERO. So the recommendation is to remove all DAO owned native tokens from the calculation of the Treasury Balance as well as the circulating supply because those amounts are not meant to be sold and are kept for bonding events. The upside of making this change is that contracting in the circulating supply would have a greater effect on increasing price.
Removing Leverage
We all saw the devastating effect that liquidations had on WL the moment the crypomarket turned bearish and the ability to leverage creates particular weaknesses for rebase protocols like WL (again, suggest reading The Professor’s article here and doing your own research). However, if rebasing is taken out off the equation as proposed above, and there is a max supply of the tokens also proposed above, then leveraging would not be subject to the same levels of volatility and the ability to leverage could be reinstated by vote of the DAO anytime in the future.
Importantly, whether the events detailed by The Professor are evidence of an actual orchestrated attack on WL by directly taking advantage of leveraging and liquidation prices, The Professor’s explanation of what happened prior to the liquidation cascade points out the extreme weakeness of allowing a leveraging option as part of a rebase protocol. Without additional protections, a similar event could occur in the future.
Basic recommendation step for this part is: No more wMEMO leverage on Abracadabra.
No Bail Out for Liquidations
The Professor includes this in his suggestion to Remove Leveraging because the topics go hand-in-hand, but I believe its important enough to be addressed by the community separately. Risk is risk, and the people who leveraged their positions and got liquidated took that risk and suffered the consequences. Even some of the most capable cryptoinvestors did not see the recent crash coming, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that investing in anything with any level of risk that has clearly outlined consequence of liquidation is a personal choice made by the individual.
The purpose of the backing price is to secure that amount for people who actually own, currently, the wMEMO that is being backed, and when you get liquidated you unfortunately don’t own the wMEMO you leveraged. This point should be obvious, but as The Professor says, if you live by the sword, you die by the sword.
Halt the Merger w/ Abracadabra
This is another point I highly recommend reading for yourself, and that I believe should be voted on by the community:
- Keep the WL and Abracadabra protocols and brands separate while still giving those that want to merge the ability to so. WL will still be able to utilize the synergies with Abracadabra to gain a competitive advantage in the market.
Create an Education Platform
The recommendation here is relatively simple:
- Allocate a small portion of the Treasury to hire a professional team to create an education platform to educate the community and that can be updated on a regular basis.
a. This will help to bring in new investors in an efficient way.
b. We already have invested members of the community who could either help to explain what type of education (videos, guides, etc.) or actually do the work themselves. One such recommendation are individuals like Defi Magick who is himself a huge proponent of Dani and WL and has experience doing exactly this type of education on his youtube (which I highly suggest watching if you are starting out in crypto or would like updates on new projects).
2 Likes
I wrote this in another thread but will repeat here since this has more exposure.
I disgree with the rage quit proposal. Fundamentally letting a group of anonymous people take a fraction of the treasury is unfair and opportunistic. The biggest problem with rage quit is there is no guarantee that this will not happen in the future again. What if some group people want to rage quit again in the future then what? Allow some group of people that maybe attacking the system to raid the treasury again? I would even compare this to a bank robbery holding us up threatening us, and we are voting to allow this to happen… absurd in my opinion. The only time the treasury should be dismantled is if the DAO dissolves. People who want to rage quit can just sell their shares of Time, memo or wmemo. Just because you own a stock and you get mad at the management doesn’t mean you can take a portion of the company’s assets. You just sell your stock.
Alternatively, there are other options :
- Since the problem originates from the treasury not initiating a buyback when price fell below the backing price, initiate this immediately.
- Then to compensate for the late action, burn all wonderland tokens transacted from the point of inflection to the point of buyback.
3 Likes
I second this. I’m also against rage quit option.
If community feels strongly about having rage quit, then a snapshot of all holders before sifu gate or earlier should be used.
That way, the sharks circling waiting to loot Wonderland treasury will be excluded.
yes, get him in, and make the changes now.
keep apy, its a good marketing tool,
(or make it transparent to all holders, what their share of the treasury is, and what their expected gains will be every month, based on current treasury and investments)
2 Likes
Hello I hope @the_professor sees this why not do a single coin no rebases just stake and get a reward you can redeem “like farming” would be ideal so that way you can let it stack up and redeem all at once (offers tax shelter like Wmemo this way)
that way people still see a “ticker” as well for the psychological effect/ feel good
i read both the wonderland 2.0 proposal as well as the professor’s proposal. I like this one better.
1 Like
Lets go! And after we rebuilt Wonderland our next goal is the Royal Mint of Spain lol
Just kidding, I love the ideas proposed here. I am definitely willing to continue this awesome project.
Lets bring this to vote!
let’s together push forward Professor’s proposal
1 Like
I like The Professor thoughtful writing. +1 for me. Let’s move on to RFC pls.
1 Like
Read Professor’s latest article on rage quit option. He/she sounds reasonable and provides a win-win solution that both sides could agree on. Read and let’s put it for a vote.
Professor’s latest article on rage quit
I would disagree with a new coin and a new name…Yes sifugate is real…we rectified it…Getting newer names and coins will only confuse people…look at what happened when focus on TIME was shifted to wMEMO…lots of confusion…and then shifting of liquidity from TIME to wMEMO…shifting of LP from TJ to SUSHI…
These are all the sudden changes that creatted a flutter in the ranks and the whales ran thru the project.
So I request all of you, NO CHANGE TO THE WAY THINGS WERE…Let it run the way it was running…Deploy yhe treasury capital to earn returns…look for newer projects like Betswap and liquid staking…Make betswap and liquid staking work (WL receives revenue)…
And just like they say in the madagascar movie…just smile and wave boys…Just Mint and Stake Frogs…
This is the real situation…Hard but true
Another NEW CURRENCY…WTF…we scrambled when we shifted from TIME to wMEMO…now another coin and that will be the end of WL…please stop pivoting so much
1 Like
I like the proposal but have two suggestions
- The proposal suggests 20% of revenue to be shared. I think 50% should be shared. A lot of people have lost money. Sharing a higher % for now will instil confidence in investors. It can be reduced to 20% later if community votes for it.
- No buybacks as it drains the treasury of valuable funds
1 Like
Currently the earning of WL is less than 3% per month…So if your share of treasury is $10,000 then at 100% payout you would receive less than $300
To have a current treasury share of $10,000…assuming you are 60% down, you would have had to invest $25,000 initially…
So net net, it’s like getting say $250 odd for an investment of 25K…are you happy with profit sharing?
Would you rather have the money remain in WL where it might grow faster than the current RoI and thus giving you an overall better returns in a year or 2
Am I making any sense…