Wonderland 2.0

I haven’t removed my funds because I want to cut my loses with wonderland 2.0

Looks very familiar to me!!! I made this proposal a few days ago and the only thing I would change is Dani not being included!


If the whales wants to leave, ok, sell their wmemo. The treasury will not give whales the backing price, because the protocol has been attacked. Without the treasury, the frogs have no capital, and governance power are meaningless. Protecting the treasury from being eaten by whales is fundamental to continuing wonderland.


It should become an 2. [RFC] Request For Comment


That BSGG snapshot was taken weeks ago, supposedly. If so, it should be adhered to as originally promised. KEEP your original word. Don’t twist and turn as is convenient. Restore some faith this way. It’s a path to bringing the people back.

1 Like

RFC: https://dao.wonderland.money/t/bastion-detailed-proposal-for-treasury-management/
Overtaking treasury keys from Dani & co. to any other will the hardest part for now - nearly impossible. Please let’s try it.

Could you please clarify this phrase “Firstly, those who no longer wish to participate in the DAO may redeem any wMEMO purchased prior to Jan 29, 2022, 6:00AM UTC for treasury equivalent MIM at the backing price.”

Does that mean anyone who has purchased (irrespectively of whether they sold their tokens or were liquidated) can redeem? Or is it anyone who purchased and still holds the wMEMO tokens?

1 Like



Hey i answered in discord as well, but will post the same here for those reading along:

Hey, of course. This sentence means those who currently hold wMemo may redeem that wMemo if it was in their wallet before that snapshot.

Example 1: you had 1 wmemo before 29 Jan and bought another 1 wmemo after 29 jan, you may redeem 1 wmemo (the first one).

Example 2: you had 1 wmemo before 29 jan, but sold it on 30 jan, you cannot redeem.

Example 3: you bought 1 wmemo on 30 Jan, you cannot redeem.

Some context: we do not want to lock anyone into Wonderland 2.0 who does not want to be there. This is a community effort, and those who want to continue should want to be part of the community.

We are currently revising this based on ongoing developments, such as the implementation of WIP#4 and AIP#7.

Regardless of these developments our strategy remains, create as much value as we can for our community and offer a reasonable way out for those that want to leave.

Does answer your question?

Side note: Gladly, if you have ideas you’d like to see become reality in Wonderland 2.0, let us know!


Lets do this people. I like this idea. Get the proposal out to a vote. We need to remove Squirrel as well

I think we should clarify, we’re not suggesting a takeover. This is a framework for the community to move forward with transparency and accountability.

If we believe in @daniele vision, then he should be voted into the role of Chief Strategy Officer and continue to give vision. But he shouldn’t need to be CSO, CFO, CMO and a builder. No one should. It’s too much responsibility and workload for just a few people.


Did we agree already to reimburse our initial investment?
All those votes are ill conceived

I am happy to quit with my initial 13.5 ETH and happy to invest somewhere else. Thanks
not interested in all this comedy. Here there is too much personal emotions and very few facts

This is an excellent idea. Thanks for the medium article.

1 Like

I agree. Votes should pertain to elected representatives to serve as our voice and make decisions for us. Placing investment decisions to a vote will result in our investments getting front run. We will slow down to a crawl if every decision requires a vote.

1 Like

Make sure to input your comments in the RFC if they were not addressed.

1 Like

I think that’s a valid perspective. We initially made that proposal when it appeared the vote was going to be unwinding the treasury and ending Wonderland. We believed that would be the way to ensure the most people received the fairest payment.

Obviously, the vote went to not ending Wonderland, so the management of the airdrop can be done as it was announced. That avoids giving additional BSGG to liquidation and post-sifugate buyers too. Thank you for your feedback. We’ll likely update that language.

1 Like

I finally had a chance to look at your proposal. You had responded to my proposal for volunteer committees. I love what you have here so far, to be honest. It’s well fleshed out, and I am surprised you were able to put it together so quickly! I do think we should have a puppet and crayon version for those of us who struggle with certain concepts once you finalize for RFC.
I agree with OxVonBismark that voting on everything would be a bit much, but maybe if we did have committees who oversaw different categories, we could consider them representatives for the smaller stuff. I really appreciate your enthusiasm and initiative.

( Edited for grammar errors. )


I run a fund focused on NFT/P2E gaming and metaverse projects, and feel I have expertise that could add value to the frog community. I love the direction of this proposal, and would like to be considered as an investment manager focused on the NFT/P2E gaming space by the community and whatever oversight committee is selected by the DAO.


Shouldnt there be some incentive for people to buy wmemo now at these discounted prices? Unless I am missing something

The market currently offers a great price to get in if you want to invest longtime. We should not be giving a discount to incentivize people though.