I like the revenue share option or a profit share option.
What I think most of the frogs are missing is that there need to be an UTILITY to the token. Getting some yield on your token is a great utility that adds value to the token price.
This pushes us to the next logical step: How do we implement it?
I see a transition to the new token as a very logical solution.
The calculation of the backing price isn’t just any arbitrary calculation. The documents of the treasury says the following:
They said that in relation to liquidations:
“No, I’m going to use treasury funds to buy back below backing as promised and divert these rebought tokens to victims who lost from the cascade at a very low price”
"I’m saying that I intend to make whole those who were liquidated under Dani and I, well under backing price, during these black swan events. If the DAO votes against doing this using tokens acquired via buybacks, we will do it using our own funds. This is a one time thing.
Why we tell leverage people “you know the risks” and people from the rage quit “yes”. However, I do agree we have to offer a solution, but it’s not something we promised. This is the first time we will vote on it. There was no promise to give the treasury to token holders when the backing price is below it.
Making a safelist(whitelist) contract is not hard. We can maintain the markets open. Give the people who want a Rage Quit a 3 day window to enlist themselves in the safelist, and after the team can get the funds from the treasury, establish a date, and the people from the safelist get their share. In that way, there is much more secure, no-arbitrage because it’s a one-time thing, and we can maintain markets open
All TIME/MEMO/wMEMO held by the Treasury is not included in the backing price. This has always been the case. You can do a rough calculation yourself and you’ll see if they include all those tokens, the backing price on the dashboard would be nowhere near where it is now
Yes, but the entire time Sifu and Dani said they would continue buy backs under backing.
That’s exactly what I’am saying. Making the claim that we have to do the rage quit only because they announce they will buy when the price is below is no different from saying we should pay all liquidations if they happened below price. The two claims are equally valid.
And Sifu make a mistake because if treasury is used to do buybacks you have less treasury and the backed price is reduced. Discord
And by the way, taking every discord message as 100% "we have to because they said so, its not just how DAOs work. Saying “have the opportunity to test the buyback promise at Wonderland” doesn’t mean we are forced to stop all our liquidity, in all our open market so that people can redeem a part of the treasury. Why we did all those buybacks if all those millions are now worthless? Almost 15 million since he wrote that message. Probably because sifu never thought that the treasury he and the team built for months was going to be distributed like this.If we allow people to do it, its because we want to give an exit option to some holders not because we are force to do it to keep a promise.
I really don’t understand what your argument is anymore.
Are you simply against the exit option? You’re kind of all over the place.
All you have shown is that dividends won’t change which is not a surprise. So you’re either delusional or you know exactly what you are doing
You’re back and making less sense than ever. How am I delusional when I have math to back it up?
Again, you are not responding to anything. You have shown that dividends won’t change which is not a surprise. Tom’s gains nothing from letting rage quit happen is the bottom line. You won’t get your arbitrage so quit trying
Actually nothing changes for Tom. We responded to your nonsense about DCA which already makes huge assumptions about price impact.
Tom could easily DCA here and make a nice gain if there is a exit option at backing. He would have made close to 40% gain already in fact if he bought near the bottom a few days ago.
So what else do I need to respond to?
So you just admitted nothing changes for Tom, so he is not better off with the rage quit option.
And then you talk about Tom gaining from exiting at backing? LOL. Your main assumption was that Tom did not want to exit at backing. You just exposed yourself xD
@Shrop_99_Degen guys I was excited that this post had a bunch of comments 
Get a room and make a thread in #dao-discussion instead lul
In any well run organization there is accountability of responsible persons / officials. This is achieved by;
Any new proposal must address these points.
Thanks Shrop_99_Degen.
the Professor posted NEW,
Shorop_99_Degen wrote WL2.0+Professor
and a lot of discussion are on going at forums (Wonderland, Abracadabra etc).
i try to update my 001 by “reordering, deleting and adding”.
if possible, check and give me comments.
[competitive advantages] >>>>>>>>>>>>>
<Professor_a1>. Large and passionate community
<Professor_a2>. Strong Brand: “Fuck the Suits”
<Professor_a3>. Prior success in other projects
→Defi Bank (Abracadabra)
→automated market maker/yield hunting platform ( Popsicle)
[Limone]: 1. Automates the process of identifying the most profitable yield farms for a given LP, allowing also leverage. 2. Compounds any rewards generated directly back into the LP to supercharge your returns.
[JIT(Just in time liquidity)]: 1. The blockchain is constantly monitored for large trades. 2. When a large trade (buy or sell transaction) occurs on Uniswap V3, liquidity from Popsicle Finance is deployed into a narrow tick range allowing us to capture almost all (99.9%) of the trading fees for this trade. 3. The liquidity for this trade is then automatically removed within a single block.
[Order Book Dex]
[Leveraged PLPs]: 1. An initial PLP is created by entering into a Univ3 pool or Limone Pool on Popsicle Finance. 2. Users are able to apply leverage to this PLP via using Abracadabra Money but using Popsicle Finance’s UI.
→decentralized exchanges (Sushiswap)
[highlight of success] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
Professor_Phase0: Raging in Wonderland. ]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
OLD: Professor_c04. Allow a Rage Quit Solution.
— Allow Rage Quitting for those that want to exit by locking trading for 48 hours, then burn tokens to increase the price well above backing. Win-win for both sides.
— Implement anti robot technology to prevent bots from gaming the system and our own bot for automatic buybacks to protect backing price but only for the short term.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
WL2_Phase1: Govern ////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
WL2_Phase2: Engage ///////////////////////////////////
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////
WL2_Phase3: Strategy ///////////////////////////////
////////////////////////////////////////////////////
[Professor2]=[Shrop_99_Degen]=[Gilgamesh04]
Professor_c03. Management Structure
— Keep Dani on as CSO (Chief Strategy Officer) and free him up from Treasury Management to maximize his strengths.
— Restructure management, bring in a COO, CFO, Treasury Managers, Investment Manager, Communications Director/Risk Manager and other external consultants. If we are truly to grow, there needs to be a larger team helping to push it forward.→[One of the proposals ]
+Bastion Trading / TheSkyhopper to manage or advise on Wonderland Treasury
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
WL2_Phase4: Grow ///////////////////////////////////
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Professor_c07. The Merger
— In $SPELL, to have Abracadabra own the majority of the MIM liquidity and not need to be exposed the mercenary liquidity, which will increase price pressure for the Spell token.
— In $wMEMO[=speculative ex1.excited seeing rebase, ex2.early stage VC],not to be interested in waiting around for a year for the token to double or triple in value.
[proposals ]
AIP #7: Expecto Patronum: A shield for all frogs ← A-Train’s proposal.
AIP #6: Frog Nation: A bold idea potentially becomes the biggest thing Crypto and DeFi have ever seen.
Step 1: Create a pool with 2 assets, either stable or volatile, this can be done via the BaseV1Router01.addLiquidity
Step 2: Add a gauge to the pool you just created via BaseV1Voter.createGauge
Step 3: Vote for the pools which you would like to incentivize through Solidly via the BaseV1Voter.vote
Token emission will start 2 weeks after the deployment of the Solidly ecosystem, as can be reviewed on BaseV1Minter
The projects receiving the veNFT’s will own 25% of the protocol in perpetuity, this % will remain fixed, as can be reviewed in ve-distribution
From there only two things to do (optionally) weekly;
Deployment will occur as soon as the all project details have been received and the last pending audit has been finalized and published.
For integration, please review the testnet addresses as found here
For documentation, please refer to the github found here
To run locally, simply git clone > npm install > npx hardhat test
- SOLIDITY-distribution
Abracadabra:0xb4ad8B57Bd6963912c80FCbb6Baea99988543c1c 642992
SushiSwap:0xF9E7d4c6d36ca311566f46c81E572102A2DC9F52 609195
Morpheus Swap:0x9685c79e7572faF11220d0F3a1C1ffF8B74fDc65 536754
Fin.
I’ll @ you when I think it’s worthy lol
Yes, I agree 100%. But this is always handled by the DAO. Consider the vote to remove Sifu. I’m not sure if we necessarily need to specify something here.
I do think this will be very important for the Treasurer. This is something we can really discuss and specify in that proposal.
This proposal is more of a high level framework
This is a very good idea. We would still need to figure out the best way to combine them.
the revenue sharing point´s too difficult to understand. I didn´t understand how it will work
This is a very traditional view and I think for the DAO we need something more fitting to what we are trying to achieve. Audits are only useful once they are done. Whereas some kind of monitoring, alert system of whats happening in the treasury and the market has immediate input into operations. Ive seen it too many times to count that moderators on discord end up with the brunt of the work due to the sheer amount of issues are observed by stakeholders. Dani and Sifu were not alerted swiftly enough when time was of the essence. I think it’s better if this oversight community is a formal body that are compensated.
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.
