Can you elaborate on what you prefer about Professor’s proposal / what you would like to see changed?
1 Like
Why do we need a rage quite vote?..if people want out…nobody stopping them from selling at the CURRENT PRICE. Whats the problem?..please dont say “well the whales got in BELOW backing price sooooo they would like to get out right now at the Backing price so they can make DOUBLE their money”…nope…Sale at the current price…and you out.
2 Likes
Do you have a timeline for when this RFC will elevate to WIP?
I like the distribution of responsibilities and definitions of what must pass through the DAO or not.
Also the concept of gMEMO and wSHARE are good.
Splitting the treasury into multiple managers is a great idea and there could be incentives for the best performing managers.
Overall a good proposal but we need time to compare concretely with other high quality proposals such as the professor before this goes to a WIP.
2 Likes
I kind of don’t like the 5 governance roles coz it resemble too much to the traditional corporate structure, the 30% performance fee is also too steep. Improvement on these two aspects are needed before I can consider supporting this 2.0.
1 Like
We’re very busy gathering, discussing and implementing feedback.
Next to that we’ve identified a few areas that we want to flesh out a little further to make sure the proposal is fully implementable.
Once we’ve covered those we’d be ready to submit the proposal as a WIP. (max. 5 days)
At the moment we are unsure if our WIP-application would go through immediately, or whether our proposal would be batched with similar proposals.
Having to wait for the similar proposals to reach the WIP stage would allow us to finetune Wonderland 2.0 even better to the community’s will. At the other hand, we should not wait long with making a step forward. Wonderland 2.0 sets the basis on which we can keep improving.
tldr: from our side max 5 days, but we do not know how the team wants to handle this.
2 Likes
We need a vote because if you read the proposal, you will see that the current rage quit option is for holder who held on january 28th. So if we can move that date further back it would be nice, but we need the community on board
2 Likes
I think first things are getting our team shored up, like the professors proposal. Super important
hi @LarryFisherman.
I like your idea. but I have 1 thing to talk about:
Im gonna be the one who wants to rage quit. but it looks unfair for people like me to choose the backing price of wMEMO at the date of 28th Jan.
it looks more fair for people who want to be in the project in further (more than a half of the community, according to Dani’s snapshot). and I think the amount of that half will grow up, after the community sees good and positive perspectives about WLAND 2.0.
talking about more fair date of backing price:
let’s come back to the price dump on 17th jan. according to that price before dump, we are still broke. me personally down 65% (16th jan) vs almost 80% (28th jan).
MY PROPOSAL IS TO CHANGE THE PRICE DATE IN YOUR PROPOSAL FOR RAGE QUITERS TO 16TH OF JAN
your proposal is great for the community, but do not forget about people who don’t wanna be a part of it anymore, about people who lost their hope.
appreciate yall for attention.
1 Like
wont having one token make it easier for whales or advisories to manipulate the price. I think having multiple tokens makes it easier to protect. time memo and wmemo can be more effective with lockup times.
we should however include more of the professors suggestions, that really is the best article out there, and i for one do not want bastion trading to take over.
2 Likes
Tagging all others who I could find commenting on ragequit:
@pmapp @FarmGirl (like your original argument!) @Kingmaker9999 @willk1515 @neil @TabulaRasa @Nimrod @DegenShaker @mcgeorge @76ixer
We have deliberated and decided to exclude any specific suggestion on ragequit from this proposal. A provision to require a vote on ragequit within 2 weeks of this proposal passing is included. Ragequit deserves its own seperate vote. The medium is updated to reflect this.
9 Likes
Is there no way of doing this AND keep rebases going inside wmemo? It is my understanding that time is no longer Diluted after bonding was stopped. For those of us small frogs who joined thats why we joined. We could earn more over time via staking. If we take that away those of us poor people who are trying to claw our way up will get tiny revenue share payouts than the whales do. Anyone who can post a proposal has to have at least 100 time tokens, i have 5 tokens and i minted and staked 10k usd for 2.79 time tokens to get that. If rebases are taken away, my revenue share will be way less than the whales inside frog nation
2 Likes
Rebases have no purpose anymore I’m afraid 
With profit sharing you can still earn more over time. If you want your revenue quick, you can get MIM but you pay a 30% fee. But if you are in this for the long run, your revenue will turn into gMemo over time and you only pay a 5% fee.
As for posting of proposals, we are proposing to remove the minimum amount of TIME that is required for a vote. All proposals that go through the proper procedure (Discussion>RFC>WIP) are posted for a vote by the Policy Officer.
Also worth to note, small long-term holders get a relatively stronger vote.
3 Likes
I actually think the branding is sweet as f!#k - I mean most of us are nerds in one way or another. MIM also did very well despite its name. And look how far we got with this type of branding. Largest treasury in DeFi. I don’t think that the image is tarnished to a point of no return, and even if we would rebrand, people who research in the future will find out that it was wonderland earlier anyway, so why even bother.
5 Likes
You cannot invest and then say “I changed my mind I want a refund” this is not walmart. Do you get a refund if BTC crashes? BTW I bought at 9k per TIME - down 96%
4 Likes
I know what crypto is.
But when I see there is some “backing price” and think - oh, ok, the price won’t go below that amount. I invest.
- but that number became some meme amount
- project owners shitted themselves and us too (we are fu*ed more tbh. they made tons of $)
Any other comparison to btc? This was the fault of project team/owners. Not ours. Why do you defeat them? You are down 96% dude.
Wonderland 2.0 won’t give you a lot. You may just do the same by yourself (stake some stables in defi and get your 15-20% a year) and be totally free in your desicions and timings. Here with the crowd you do not have a word when you want to. Like me right now.
Call it ‘Wonderland Matrix’ and give it a full reboot.
Agreed. I think we should keep rebases. Additionally, we need to profit share by staking wMemo so people are less likely to sell.
We have yet to try this and I think this should be tried first before doing away with rebases.
Also, fuck rage quit. Won’t vote for anything that includes that, full stop.
The proposal looks, in general, like a good foundation but I suggest adding:
Phase 0: Wrap up loose ends
I want to stick with Wonderland and move forward but we should address any unfinished business first.