Looks great make sure this goes up as a proposal within the next few days before the 5 day execution period ends and the treasury goes bye bye as per WIP#4:
“Due to this we think that if the proposal is voted against, and no counter proposal within 5 days is made by the community with relevant people who are willing to take over the multisig and willing to take on this challenge, we will still unwind the treasury. We don’t want anything to happen to users’ funds, and we would not feel confident to delegate the whole treasury to a non-structured replacement.”
This statement from WIP#4 does not explicitly state that a proposal must be accepted, only that it is ‘made’. Assuming that means submitted as as WIP. I believe we need more than 5 days to adequately assess all worthwhile proposals, but unless a proposal goes in nullifying the 5 day clause of WIP#4, something has to go up at least, and this seems like a great way to start!
Great suggestions, I think we could also learn a lot of lessons from what has been happening.
We have seen that even though we have a single treasury the project has a lot of conflicts of interest. We are all against suits, but there is a conflict between big and small investors (whales, frogs) and between long-term and short-term investors (3,3 vs arbitragers), I think all of those roles are necessary for a functioning project but there has to be a clear hierarchy between then and clear communication about the priority of those interests. The problems are larger when the main mechanisms and priorities are changing at the same time.
I respect facts that are relevant and informative to a discussion but you need to start adding something constructive to these discussions otherwise you’re just spreading fear and discontentment mostly towards single individuals who may not even have further involvement. Not what this DAO needs when it’s trying to propose and achieve consensus on a whole new governance model.
Why are you even here? Find something constructive to say or stay out of the way.
I’m a holder of Wmemo since 17th of November so this is my opinion about improvements
Suggestions about the future …
I guess we should make wonderland the the DAO of the people , make it for the average citizen and unattractive for whales . What do i mean with this ?
Well , i believe locking the token for a period +3 months and beyond will help stabilizing the price and at the same time keep the whales that just want a quick profit away. Also, more time locked = bigger APY .
For the ones that don’t want to lock their token a sell tax fee ( an unattractive one joy ) should be set to prevent selling ( average people are here for the long run ).
Liquidations should also cease . I understand that Abra is a powerful tool , but people’s emotions are too strong when comes to money , so… Just stop borrow.
Thanks, this means a great deal to us. We’re keen to support the community and the DAO’s future direction and keep building for wherever ends up being our eventual home
“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. Obviously, this will still be a loss for most people.” So … what’s the point of frogs beating whales in WIP#4? don’t try to steal assets from the treasury!
Is there an org chart for the current management structure of this DAO and can we get a proposed org chart for the management structure of this proposal? I would add regular third party audits as well if that has not been suggested already. We need something in place in relatively short order to comply with WIP4.
I know where you’re coming from - but that was when the vote was still much closer. If he indeed ignores the final result and the fact that the majority of wallet holders voted ‘NO’, then I will agree with you that he’s gone over to the dark side. I just have a hard time believing he would so completely ruin his reputation. If he is scamming us all, he’d be finished in crypto and DeFi and there would probably be lawsuits. That’s the part I’m grappling with…
So, in practice, with the WL2.0 proposal, it could be beneficial either way. If the whales are incentivized to cash out, then more governance is awarded to the frogs. For the health of the protocol, governance > funds.
But… on the other hand, the tokenomics of 2.0 would basically lock them in for a few months unless they want to hand over 50% of their investment to the treasury.
It’s mostly just a question of, “Do the frogs want more governance power or treasury power?”
If Harry wants to contribute to the proposal then he’s welcome to. We want something we can get the community behind. We can’t keep relying on billionaires and @daniele to bail us out.
My only Comment on this is. It’s been proven that the masses will not make the correct long term decisions. If all decisions are put to a vote of the DAO we will constantly make very poor mediocre decisions. I think we can vote on a Board of Directors what have the ability to fire CEO CFO Etc. But ultimately you need to empower the front line managers and let them do what they were hired to do.
Thank you. There is more information in the medium detailed proposal linked at the bottom. Phase 2 is the most critical. We would need a team working on development of new tokenomics, transition community management and establish regular voting protocols. It’s a lot of change to communicate all at once, which was why we proposed a full time marketing team.
In terms of legality, I’m curious as to what issues you could see coming up? Ideally the investment team will not be US-based but that’s up to the DAO to determine based on risk.
Why would we pay bad actors a premium to leave? Let them dump the price against themselves if they want out. At least their shares would transfer and the treasury would stay in tact.
Functionally, the way we’ve designed the tokenomics, incentivizing bad actors to leave opens up more governance token share for smaller holders. This helps to distribute the voting power more evenly at the very beginning and strengthen the protocol governance.
On the other hand, not incentivizing those actors to leave, essentially would mean they’re getting locked into the vesting schedule of the new gMEMO and wSHARE system, so unless they really hate 75% of their money, they won’t be dumping.
danielesesta — Today at 12:15 PM
Good morning Frogs,
The vote has been concluded and we hear you. The individual frogs combined took the vote back from the whales, deciding to continue Wonderland. We understand communication has been sporadic, confusing, and imprecise. There will be a period of calm over the next few days where we will listen to you, compile suggestions, and determine the best path forward. Improving communication and deciding a clear direction with this powerful community of frogs is the #1 priority.
I will be available in this server for the next 3-5 days to hear your feelings, ideas, and suggestions so we can move forward together as a community and a DAO to make everyone whole, as some people do seem like they would like to close or redeem their treasury capital. I am very proud of what the community has accomplished and am very excited for what can be done in the future. You have decided, and this isn’t over. @everyone
