The prop looks good to me but how can we make justice to those little frogs like me who bought at the ATH (invested like 14k) ? never sold a cent and by wrapping up my memo I ended up with like 0.07 wmemo. Logically if I have kept my money I would have ended up with more wmemo if I have bought at the current price. What would be your action making justice when we will be transitioning to the new version of wonderland (revenue share model) for those little frogs who invested from the beginning and never sold ?
In my pov, everyone has to unwrap their wmemo to memo, then track the price of $Time and/or wmemo of everyone when they entered the project so it would be fair for those who got from the beginning and when it was high and never left even in very low times.
Apy reduced to 0 depending we need mechanisms to help us as small investors be able to recover our actual loses in order to dream to profits in future.
Same ideas I had before but my post was like invisible only 1 like
I agree 75% with the professor. We need only one unique currency in this ecosystem however doesn’t mention much about the mechanics of these new currency if someone finds my old post they’ll see I described this
Time needs to be burned 90%of actual supply merged with Wmemo and creating a single currency with same proprieties of Wmemo because
1.Eliminates market friction and descouraging the speculators market friction is the slippage between two different prices at different rates of trading volume where the coins can be arbitrated.This can turns against you since 1 coin can grow more than other and sell it against the other can make profits and dump the price of one of them if not both .In order to avoid these situations we need the following mechanism;
2.Create a deflationary currency build into a scarcity model means a currency which is divisible by units and with each stage of growth is divisible by added units that gains in value
Example let’s name our Token WTime shares
1WTM is divided by 1000 units=1000 USD .WTM cannot never be sold under 1000 units because the protocol wouldn’t allow it it worth always 1000 USD because is covered by treasury share, treasury value and incription protocol means each unit is backed by 1 min ,Usdt etc.
Now when Wmemo grows in value acquires more units let’s say that WTM worth now 1500 USD then WTM is divisible by 1500 and so forth.
Now my criticism against the proposal refer at incentive for small traders in staking and holding as an Apy yes is sometimes considered as marketing tool but is what gives Treasury cash flows and attract investors.
Obviously an Apy must be sustainable and to achieve this we having the Burning mechanism and scarcity model
Every WTM staked must produce an Apy as result between profit shares,value of market , treasury value as whole revenue growth reported so is recommendable for clarity to have an Apy model a projection calculator build realistically and clearly specified as estimated but not guaranteed.
However how the burning mechanism and scarcity would maintain the Apy & revenue share combined?
Every token must be staked on a minimal period of 12 month’s (including the period before transition)on locked contracts.
Second every contract acquires Apy and compund interest in fact both can be offered Apy on direct stakes for non experienced investors , revenue share combined with a staking contract extended upon 1 year.
At redemption of WTM shares those can be reinvested in enhanced contracts with higher incentives as profit shares.
Every redeemed stake should be burned before redeemed in MiM therefore always the supply is getting lower from a fixed supply as no minting would be possible ,no leveraging no buy backs.
Every WTM burned at stake redemption will be put out of circulation along with the acquired units therefore the WTM cannot practically being bought back below its last price after being burned and redeemed.
As well the most important every contract must have a redemption windows to avoid the sell off cascades in order to absorb the market shock quicker and be prepared.
So with every sale of this token the supply will descrease and price will grow exponentially.
Rest of the proposals and the model is pertinent and I agreed to.
However we could require to community to comment about the WTM shares proposal I believe that would work great with professor architecture of Wonderland re-created or refurbished.
Ps I used 1000 denomination as a rough example now the initial division and conversion rate must be calculated to indexed value of both coins and considering the entry values in average for investors giving a slight advantage and compensation for Investors.
Thank you for your attention
Signed
The Engineer
This is a better proposal than the Wonderland 2.0 Full proposal. This guy seems to know what he is talking about. If he can doxx himself and provide the community with confidence in his character then we should look at hiring him as an advisor.
So far it looks like a big YES for me. I think we definitely need more time to discuss each aspect in detail and its validity but overall I havent seen anything more convincing regarding WLs future
Agree with this proposal 95%. rage quit should not be an option though. It will only allow whales to accumulate even more of the treasury and voting power. In the end they will devour WL
This guy’s post has incredible foresight. I only agree on a rage quit / liquidated buyback with other plans in place for the rest of us to move forward.
Ya, hey all. So I think that was very well put together. and I’m probably not the most educated individual (retired military). Here’s my two cents. I’m all for hiring a pro team. Every Commander needs a strong team to support the mission. However, coming from Jade, cutting the APY might not be a great idea. have you seen their price action. you can buy them for like 25 bucks or something. Time/wonderland is a completely different idea but to some people a DAO is a DAO so… That’s just my input.
Maybe. merger would involve having the new single branded token from The Professor, ith all of the constraints mentioned and the 20% distribution for revenue share and
ALSO
A way to stake the token like WL 2.0
Also, some governance elements from one would be better than the other. Am I right that we now have to vote for one or the other and that will be the roadmap going forward?
