What about a propose like this: 2 types of investments 1. Different apy for short term and for long term. 2. Different revenue share for long term investors and for short term. Obviously for short term, smaller rewards, to discourage whales. A new option can be added for everybody to choose for how long in days or months will hold their stake.
1 Like
Again, a new idea that will go nowhere. Dont you guys notice it already. Wonderland is centralized, wonderland is Dani. I refused to acknowledge this but I cant deny it anymore. There is no community power. There is only 1. And it’s Dani.
It’s been weeks after RQ. RQ obviously fail us big time. They hyped RQ will bring the price up and now the hypers are gone. They said we will move fast after RQ and nothing is announced. Nobody knows what’s in the pipeline officially and when to be deployed.
With regards to your proposal, I agree to it. There is another detailed proposal that’s kinda similar, Rev Share Idea - #4 by bottlecapman
But be careful talking about disincentivising whales, for many frogs in wonderland loves whales. I have no fking clue why but that’s the fact I see now. I suggested many idea to disincentivize whales and got shot down with reasonings “whales are good, let them manipulate wonderland price as they please, dont discourage them with taxes, locking mechanism, etc etc”.
To implement your idea is very very easy. Implement @bottlecapman 's idea with some sort of locking mechanism (1-mth, 2-mth, 3…6…12…) and the protocol can easily identify the participant to this hodlers and allow them to participate in rev share as well, just like you suggested. It’s a brilliant idea.
But then again like I said, I see it now, wonderland is Dani, so, I starting to see even this forum means nothing now. This is not FUD. This is fact. Unless somebody properly officially come out with the pipeline of what’s being worked on and when to expect completion, I will start to suggest from now on that we are being screwed on.
2 Likes
https://dao.wonderland.money/t/rfc-wonderland-moderator-compensation/17115/
Yes, I am shamelessly plugging this proposal lol. I know you have already commented on the general discussion (thank you for that), but my only personal goal with this proposal is to try to fix what you have just described.
I’ll paste something I posted in Discord in response to @endelcardoso who seemed to have came to the same realization you did not long after posting his proposals. I believe it applies well to your comment.
I was going to post about this on your proposal, but better I do it here. My main thought is this: This DAO is dysfunctional. We have hundreds of proposal/discussions that never go anywhere. We have RFCs that never go anywhere. We have a pending WIP that is not going anywhere. Your proposal, for example, is legit and we need everything on that list. But it has been proposed before. Actually, one of our first RFC touched on a lot of these points. And plenty of proposals came after trying to tackle these same issues. There are two reasons for this.
- If a proposal is not pushed/promoted from the top, it rarely gets traction.
- When a proposal gets traction, the core team is still the gate keeper at the end. Without them here to look at it/push it through, it doesn’t move.
The solution ? We need someone on the inside.
The proposal for mod compensation includes duties to open that backdoor and let us in. Now, it doesn’t have to be the mods, we could vote anyone to help, but why does this one have a chance to work ? If you paid attention while reading this, you already know the answer. Because it is being pushed from the top.
Proposals as broad as Fix Wonderland, usually don’t make the cut.
The proposal for a 5k MIM operational budget is a nice idea, we thought of including it in our proposal before, but thought it should have its own. The issue with this one is giving a budget to someone that has no authority in this server and then volunteers Alice (2 other multi sig) becomes liable for the money. Also, multi sig on a 5k budget might be excessive, but I guess the amount could grow. However, when it comes to spending money, people want to know the plan and have the receipt for things you didn’t buy yet and up to 5 years.
Improve communication and treasury tracking. Well improve communication is just the same song on repeat since launch, but treasury tracking… We have an RFC right now for increased transparency of the treasury and reports. Yet, someone made a new proposal about it.
Do you start to see a trend here ? We’ve seen all these proposal come up and die time and time again. Yet, now that we have a proposal that could break this pattern, people want to wait for a TM and don’t want to spend in a year what we used to 3x in a day or even pay in 2 days when we were at our worse farming amount.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy that people like you want to move things forward and have good ideas, but like I said, this DAO is dysfunctional and unless it gets the attention it deserves, I don’t see it getting better
As for @CLA1 if we had a better structure we could flesh out your idea and see the potential it has, but I’m afraid it is not fleshed out enough to currently get any traction.
1 Like
I agree, RQ should have never implemented its just to pay the whales and voltures.
It was poorly implemented in my opinion and it gave nothing to the holders…
1 Like
How we can fix this issue? we need proposals on what we need to do and how to implement maybe and not just ideas?
I don’t think it is a good idea to separate the revenue.investors invest in the project as a whole why split the project in two?
As biased as this might sound. I believe the current mod proposal is the best temporary solution we have right now.
Since I’ve been in WL my main focus has always been on Governance. I was pushing for DAO structure before the DAO was launched and still am. I believe it is the main reason for me becoming a mod.
I have always been vocal about the lack of structure and plan to continue begins so. The current proposal would help me harness the community’s feedback and push through what the DAO believes to be the way forward.
1 Like
Maybe we should create a council of people that got time to dedicate to the wonderland and can highlight / vet / propose ideas/suggestions/proposals.
Token holders can vote for council members and Council members should be replaceable at any time by vote.
They may also combine topics that are similar and filter out clear the information that is not needed.
1 Like
That’s definitely the type of things I would like to look into!
It’s not so hard to do, let’s create the idea in the forum to discuss further when the details are discussed we put it to a vote.
After the vote pass, we make a candidate selection in discord.
1 Like
Not so hard eh, you have not seen proposal by bastion is it? or 100 other proposal by nameless frogs in here. Or the professor. Started months ago, received thousands of views and hundreds of comment, even 1 went to rfc. Does it got to snapshot vote phase? hehe… think about it… why…
1 Like
Yeah I’ve read the bastion and professor 
I know it takes time but its not such a complicated think to start at least it will get complicated down the line.
I have to agree with you here!
My issue is and yes it might be somewhat selfish is that the Rage Quit option allowed everyone to exit, maybe not too happily but exit nevertheless.
I’m a long term holder in Wonderland and had a small leverage with MIM. Due to the whole debacle with Sifu and the price falling under the backing, the backing process not happening caused me to liquidate somewhat. Now I didn’t capitulate totally and also I did not abuse the leveraging whatsoever. I am still a little annoyed that even still as I continue to hold that the Rage Quit seemed to give at least some value to those wishing to get out. The price tanking after the RQ wiped out any gains I had made during the time from the Sifu mess until the RQ happened.
Now look, I’m not crying about this and whilst I am frustrated, it was money I considered lost once invested. What I am seeing after the Rage Quit is that the long term holders just seem to be getting forgotten about, no I don’t expect anything but if it was fair to offer the RQ then shouldn’t it be fair to offer the long term holders something also? We are at roughly a 90%+ loss and yet had the vision to invest early in a project that on the face of it could have done very well. After all there wasn’t a rug pull, the project didn’t collapse (technically), what happened was en mass exiting and FUD after Sifu’s true identity came out.
Looking at it fairly, nothing Sifu did in his time in control of the treasury caused anyone any concern at all, he was very open about the future and ongoing investments with the treasury capital but as soon as he was doxxed well it just caused a cascade effect. I do wonder if his identity hadn’t come out would we be sat here in as much of a mess as it is now.
For what it’s worth, I have no reason to exit my position, not that if I did it would mean anything meaningful to me either. I personally at the moment just don’t see this going anywhere. Without someone bringing a team together and having them properly put forward a real set of proposals and ways to move forward this will just stagnate. What I don’t mean however, is have an external team come in and offer a solution, what I ideally would like is for a team to be formed of people well versed in Wonderland, Avalanche and DAO platform investing and giving us options.
2 Likes
100% deserved ! i support this one
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.