[RFC] Wonderland 2.0

Governance Archive [RFC] Request for Comment
1

10 Feb – Thank you for all comments, suggestions and criticism on this RFC, we have improved the proposal and submitted it as WIP!

1-Feb – Over 100 frogs have shared their questions, ideas and suggestion for Wonderland 2.0. We answered, clarified and incorporated all of them. Together we’ve significantly improved the proposal. Keep your ideas, suggestions and improvements coming!

Name:
[RFC] - Wonderland 2.0

Scope:
This proposal regards the following aspects of Wonderland:

  • Governance
  • Strategy
  • Team
  • Tokenomics

Link to previous [DAO Discussion]:
“[DAO Discussion] - Wonderland 2.0”

Objective:
We need to come together as frogs and establish a foundation to take our first leap towards the future.

Provide a High Level Overview:

  • Phase 1: Govern
  • Phase 2: Engage
  • Phase 3: Strategy
  • Phase 4: Grow

Provide Low Level Details:

Phase 1: Govern
We want to empower us, the frogs. All key decisions will be run through the DAO. Your vote decides which investments are made, which team members are hired or fired, and all other important changes in Wonderland.

To enable us to govern the DAO we’ll need to adjust a few things:

  1. Responsibilities — we need to make clear what has to by ran by the DAO and which decisions can be made by the team.
  2. Voting procedure — for the things that need to go by the DAO we’ll have to implement a strict procedure that details how we go from idea to implementation.
  3. Community engagement — we’ll need to clean up the forum and be more strict in forum moderation.
  4. Voting weights — we have to make some adjustments to voting itself. Votes get dominated by the large players, we want to move to quadratic time-weighted voting to give the little frogs a louder voice.

Second, we need to have a look at the internal organization of Wonderland. We can’t be dependent on single individuals for crucial decisions. So, we want to install an oversight committee & advisory board. They will make sure that Wonderland stays in-line with the decisions of the DAO. Their main responsibilities is safeguarding the long-term stability of Wonderland.

Phase 2: Engage

As mentioned, the goal is to empower the frogs. Wonderland’s biggest resources is not its treasury, but rather our community.

By engaging the community throughout the protocol’s evolution, we have the potential to pick from the minds of hundreds of thousands of frogs. Together we are stronger and together we can thrive. The changes suggested in the governance model will facilitate the sharing ideas and promote community engagement to ensure we come out on top with the best proposals.

Communication and transparency with the frogs will be a priority to ensure that our vision is clear and that things are moving forward with promises that we can be accountable for and a clear, aligned agenda.

This means regular AMA’s, higher visibility of the team and over-all more two-way communication.

Phase 3: Strategy

Treasury management has been a hot topic recently. We believe a decentralised treasury management model is the solution to concerns that have been raised. What does that look like?

We’ll no longer have a single treasury manager, instead we’ll have an oversight committee, a financial officer and a whole bunch of small investment managers.

  • Investment managers — Any person or team can submit a proposal to manage part of Wonderlands treasury. When approved their results and behaviour are closely monitored.
  • Oversight committee — The oversight committee keeps a close eye on all investment managers. They make sure that the investment managers stay in-line with the DAO’s decisions. They can pull the treasury capital from investment managers at any time
  • Financial officer — The financial officer is responsible for the day-to-day operations regarding all Wonderlands finances. Just like the investment managers, the financial officer too is monitored by the oversight committee.

Phase 4: Grow

Once we have a stable and smoothly running DAO, it’s time for expansion. At that point, it should be clear that Wonderland is still alive and well and that our past no longer define us. Wonderland will be a rising phoenix who overcame adversity to be successful.

In the growth phase we’ll see increase of marketing budgets and community outreach. Wonderland is here to help all the frogs and we will be a giant in DeFi.

It will be easier to attract new investors and shift our focus to attracting more capital to ensure a proper redistribution to the frogs who helped make this resurrection a success.

Business and/or technical requirements of the implementation of the proposal:

Please read our full proposal here: Wonderland 2.0. A strategized move forward | by Wonderland 2.0 | Jan, 2022 | Medium

[RFC] - Wonderland 2.0

  • Move forward with Wonderland 2.0
  • Keep Wonderland as it is
0 voters
31 Likes
2

I would really like to add that Wonderland needs a full re-brand.

A uniform presentation on all socials, media and everything that is visually representing Wonderland Now its a combination of a scary cat, frogs, wizards, etc. A real branding nightmare.

In my opinion it is just as important as the technical side of the plan and should be taken care of parallel to everything else in Phase 2 or 3.

28 Likes
3

I agree. 100% I’ve been trying to get it through for months. We got a 700M+ treasury. Even 1M for branding, Marketing, UX, API’s for Danieles Twitter and Medium and we’d have a much bigger, better beast to work with.

7 Likes
4

I reiterate that if anyone wants to get out, just sell wmemo. The treasury NOT give him a backing price because the protocol has been attacked by whales. If you keep ignoring this, I don’t think your proposal is any different from WIP#4.

13 Likes
5

I think this is a fair point. This was done during the initial vote.

I think it should definitly be revised based on the amount of people who brought this up.

4 Likes
6

I’m behind the proposal and also happy to help out and contribute to future governance initiatives. Well considered and written, well done!

4 Likes
7

I also feel that if anyone wants to get out, just sell wmemo. The treasury is not to give anyone an “out” at backing price because the protocol has been attacked by whales. Doing this will be a detriment to WL2 and it will take us a lot longer to rebuild the funds they are taking.

10 Likes
8

This sounds sweet as hell i’d go for a vote on this one.

6 Likes
9

Totally agree. I think this is something the marketing team we propose could work on right away. It’s important to get governance setup first though.

Looking Glass Capital or something like that sounds nice…

1 Like
10

Given the circumstances around Wonderland, I am for this Proposal. We need to be looking for more structure, especially after these past events.

7 Likes
11

All fine except for offering wMemo holders backing price.

4 Likes
12

Also @linolime and @DegenShaker

We’ve moved the date back with 1 day, to 28th of jan, so before the announcement of WIP#4 (unwinding proposal). There is a general concensus that using the 28th as reference rather than the 29th benefits the community.

There is an ongoing discussion to move the date back further, to pre-sifu gate. The argument would be that a lot of investors came in post-sifu gate, who have no intention to be part of the community.

A third perspective is that there should be no redemption of wmemo at the backing price in our proposal. The argument is that the community is divided on whether to offer redemption of wmemo. Thus, there should be a seperate proposal in the future which is exlcusively about redeeming wmemo for the backing price.

What are your opinions?

6 Likes
13

@linolime and @DegenShaker

I would also note that with the way the token mechanics are reworked in the detailed proposal, it rebalances the power dynamics and revenue share dynamics.

If those who bought wMEMO after sifu-gate were incentivized to leave, then it increases the gMEMO pool for holders and strengthens the protocol in the long term since those with the most governance power are those who are actually invested in the project.

On the other hand, if there’s no exchange at backing price, the people who bought in below backing would be incentivized to stay with the protocol and increase the size of the treasury since dumping would mean they lose from the vested performance fee and all of that money would go into the treasury.

So, technically, the holders win either way. More power or more profit. The community can decide.

4 Likes
14

Very well thought out proposal. I like many of the points brought up and feel it makes a lot of sense. I believe that I have come up with an ideal use for the wMemo currently held in the treasury for use in a revenue share model. I invite you to take a look at it and see where you might be able to use some of those ideas to improve even further.

https://dao.wonderland.money/t/proposal-to-utilize-wmemo-held-in-treasury-to-incentivize-long-term-hodlers/12392?u=carlo

1 Like
15

I can say I really like the concept and the way you lay it out is pretty good. The idea of a bonus is interesting to me in particular, I’m just unsure of what would balance out the bonus since revenue has to be a zero sum game. Love where you’re going with it though.

Did you get a chance to look at the token mechanics we proposed in the detailed proposal? It has a similar result, but uses a vesting period and a 2nd token. I wrote a Twitter thread explaining it in an easier to digest way. https://twitter.com/0xhedgehog/status/1488317114985422855?s=21

2 Likes
16

Sifu game start when he promise the airdrop that never came. He incentive the people to HOLD waiting for the Airdrop. I think a fairest date it is the date of that Airdrop Announcement.

2 Likes
17

DefiDaily did a great explainer of our proposal! Great explanation if you want a simplified version!

4 Likes
18

Really glad you’ve gotten a chance to read it. When you say balance out the bonus, what exactly do you mean? I just want to be clear I understand the question.

The bonus concept is based on the assumption that wMemo is the primary token since the supply has already been capped. I’m not certain how this would work with the gMemo since I believe I had read gMemo would be linked to Time/Memo… Perhaps rebranding wMemo as gMemo since supply is already capped?

I don’t know if this is the e answer to the question you’re looking for but: If the wMemo currently held by the treasury through buybacks is essentially locked to be exclusively used for the bonus then the revenue share pertaining to those “locked” tokens would be where the bonus comes from.

Depending on the tokenomics, it may not be feasible to offer a 100% bonus since that would essentially mean that the treasury would theoretically need to possess half of the circulating supply in order to pay out the bonus… Any unused/unallocated revenue share from tokens held in treasury should simply be rolled into the treasury to let it continue to grow.

I hope that addressed your question, but if I missed the mark let me know and perhaps I can provide a better response.

19

To be honest we all could have sold after the snapshot. That being said, Im not sure this is really relevant to this RFC.

20

!!

Before a proposal such as this gets taken to a WIP, the following audit needs to happen (ignoring the part about funds being reimbursed).

While there has been questionable actions that are cause for concern and reason enough for an audit such as this, I hope and would like to see Dani and Sifu absolved of any wrongdoing, divisions in the community repaired, and an end to all the hate and FUD!!

https://dao.wonderland.money/t/proposal-full-forensic-audit-before-any-funds-are-reimbursed/12205

1 Like