You’re right. What you described is using the compounding pool. Note that all wSHARE that is converted into gMEMO earns you additional wSHARE, hence the name compounding pool.
To realise your profit you’d sell part of your earned gMEMO to MIM.
If you’d rather receive your revenue directly in MIM, that’s possible but you’d use the Dividend pool. You pay a higher fee to the treasury, but get your revenue payout directly.
Does this clarify your question?
It is clear now, thanks ser 
I’m supportive of efforts to increase transparency. I’m having difficult reconciling treasury managers who are incented to put money to work and reserving money necessary to enable the improvement and development of the frog ecosystem.
I suppose there are couple ways of resolving this to me; first not 100% of the treasury needs to be assigned to treausury managers and correspondingly some portion of the treasury could be reserved to enable development.
For what it’s work I think it would be useful to specify targets; like 20% of treasury would be dedicated to the development of the Frog ecosystem while 80% of treasury would be made available to treasury managers.
Can somebody give me more clarification on the Phase 2
I don’t understand the concept:
Is it the same concept that is Curve using with VE curve voting tokens and CRV?
I believe we need an utility added to the token. But is it enough to incentivizes holders?
p.s.
can we come up with a better ticker name? something like:
$WL $WNDR $WNDL ? There are to many MEMOs and TIMEs
how long will it take to WIP
That suggestion makes sense. In the Wonderland 2.0 framework it could be implemented in 2 ways:
Each core-team member submits their budget for DAO approval. Part of that budget could be dedicated to supporting the ecosystem.
The DAO will set the overall investment/treasury strategy. This strategy can include a treasury allocation for improving and developing the frognation ecosystem.
So we do not specifically include it in the proposal, but there are provisions that enable the community to choose whether, and to what extend, allocate budget to it.
The tokenomics do resemble the veCRV model in some way, although not directly.
We suggest 2 revenue sharing pools, 1 for short-term and 1 for long-term:
This resembles the curve model in the sense that ‘locking’ your tokens for longer, gives you a higher share of revenue. It’s also quite different, because it’s a soft lock, if you want out early, you can get out early. Additionally, whereas in your CRV must be locked to get voting rights through veCRV, it does not matter whether you stake gMEMO in the dividend or compound pool, you always get voting rights. The only difference is that your gMEMO balance will increase through the compound pool, so your voting rights will also increase.
Last, due to the suggested voting power calculation, we do mimic some of the veCRV behaviour. With CRV, the longer you lock your tokens, the more voting power you get per token. With gMEMO the longer you have held your token, the more voting power you get per token. So CRV considers ‘how will this user stay with us?’, we consider ‘how long has this user been with us?’.
Does this clarify your questions?
As for ticker names, we are open to suggestions that minimise confusion!
WIP has been submitted last friday (11 Feb).
Unfortunately we have no idea when the submission will be evaluated.
Of the ways forward, I think this proposal makes the most sense. I’m supportive and would love to see this move to WIP.
Revisions to Wonderland 2.0, based on the comments here, on discord and twitter:
let´s not support the rage quit hypocrisy guys. We already won the vote against the bad actors that wanted to harm WL. Let´s exclude em finally to get along on their own, without further attempts to harm us again
First we would like to see and verify the Professor identify.Seriously after SIFU episode now why you guys keep like anonymous people?
Isn’t bit shaddy how can we verify indeed if the Professor has any knowledge of managing, trading crypto currency?
Professor doesnt want to manage the treasury. Why does that matter ?
It doesn’t matter to me I will vote NO either way
Fair enough. Just to make sure, you know this isnt the professor’s proposal right ? (Serious question)
No but I’m definitely against messing with the APY too soon.
What Professor say’s it will be pennies for most of us.
According to its model the token value must be like 1 million. Scraping time looks like a con to me
Wonderland 2 is worse . Doesn’t add nothing new.
According to revenue share Wmemo or Gmemo or whatever must reach like 1 million for 90% to be able to get some profits.
The APY is the only thing that keeps the most of us here
@Danielolteanu
The apy does not generate profit. It just says something about the speed of rebasing. Holding does not give you profit.
We want to change that.
The suggestion we make is to select investment managers, to grow the treasury. The profits the investment managers make are shared with all of us, through revenue sharing.
Unfortunately it is technically not possible to implement this in a stable way without the proposed token change.
You’re saying that because you have a lot of Wmemo or you doing whales game.
You saying that APY is useless okay?
Hear this argument please and then I let you judge after.
High APY is the main rewards given to early users sure this will drop once with certain cumulation, price stability, market cap and inflation index ok?
The only argument I have it again is,
You propose to take the Time tokens bag from the little investors like me who took the risk I took the market hit whales games but I didn’t complain.
This plan is obviously a con that would advantage only the big holders I voted No and I will vote NO again.
The APY must continue its normal course until we have enough growth and now we don’t mint more tokens of any kind therefore would be a dilution which will stop towards a certain end but want to take my Time bag this is quite hard to digest.
If according to my basic Math and risk taking let’s say that in 1 year I will have 2000 Time tokens the main idea and from where to make the dollar would be the flipping trade.
However if Time stays around 10-20 USD I make X3 my initial investment and even around 3-5 USD I will still making it.
No one said anything about high APY on Pancake Swap when Cake was few cents and reached beyond 10 USD.
Now you guys after a month or so you keep saying that the APY is bad let’s make profit share ok
Give me a straight answer I invested initially around 16500 roughly now I’m like 1800 or so now you’re making a new coin ok but according to which value mate as you scrap the Old one it looks to me that I’m rinsed already.
And to my actual fraction of Wmemo hey I’ll got another fraction ok? But worth 1600 or so instead of 2000 Time tokens which I signed up for.
So according to your calculations hey how much exactly will be my ROI?
According to Wonderland 2 Con shall we say like 30 bucks monthly if I’m lucky?
Great Master Plan amazing.
Who will guarantee that whichever so called professional would deliver any results indeed as I didn’t really see any bussines plan or how to grow the treasury to make us all rich?
This is crypto mate you make it you bare the risks you take the hits and move on .What you guys propose is kinda sketchy as I don’t see much return or anything else would be like staking usdt on Binance lol 
.
Perhaps it Gmemo or whatever you might call it hits 2 millions I kind of made it all but all this is an IF … same with the APY of course.
Idea is following the natural cycle if Wonderland promised 400 days keeping the APY well we have to because that was the main promise
Now taking off the buy back , minting leveraging,locking stakes,burning mechanisms on tokens that are bought back and the liquidity transferred towards other pools seems ok.
All I see is just sudden change which is bad people don’t like sudden changes and people like me need Numbers
Like you put 1 dollar and according to profit share this is your cut how much?Well something that I can actually calculate and finding more profitable. Now after what I read on your proposal it looks for most of us like BSGC airdop but on smaller sizes we will talking about pennies …
