Thanks for your reply @Juminstock . We’ve updated the proposal to make the game a community growth tool on both astr and soon on soneium.
Events are planned, as you can read.
Before resubmitting the proposal, we held a two-hour call with the NFT Bridge team specifically to improve the community aspect.
“In addition, it can be used for event funding and community proposals.”
We structured the development to achieve exactly this. It took us time and effort to redesign everything from scratch.
Thanks @Juminstock - the new proposal needs to be active for 7 days - currently on 5 days - and it can then be submitted on chain.
@SFY_Labs and @ilan need to choose which council they will apply for.
Apologies for the back and forth on this.
That sounds great. Sorry if I got lost among so many messages, but is there a formal document with your proposal where I can take a look at these community-focused changes you mentioned? It’s important to highlight that this is not yet an evaluation as a Community Council member, but rather an observation from my position as a manager.
FFR23, this period starts from the moment a topic is created in the Astar forum, and you know that.
In fact, this must be decided before submitting the proposal, since the treasuries fund different types of requests, as Gaius explains here: [Council Treasury Request] SFY Labs – Age of Chronos: Developing a Strategic Multichain NFT Game on Astar (Milestone 1 of 3) - #31 by Gaius_sama
If the community council chooses to support our proposal, we will work together with the ambassadors and promoters present to create completely free online gaming events where players can develop their characters, including bridge on Soneium. This would align with the points you mentioned above. @Juminstock
If, after re-evaluating the updated proposal, the main council decides to support it and place its trust in our team—especially considering the collaboration that will encourage different teams within the ecosystem to interact and strengthen it—we would be happy to move forward with this approach. @Gaius_sama @Maarten
From the very first days after resubmitting our project, we were assured of an objective evaluation and support if our work was well received by the community.
We first raised the issue on the forum because, after three proposals and a referendum with overwhelming support that ultimately failed, we all know why. The community’s wishes were not truly respected, and we believe it is right, given the still unfortunately immature governance, that the bodies responsible for overcoming these difficulties take action in this direction.
Everything is already in place: a complete game, its expansion, collaboration among multiple teams, integration with Soneium, a referendum that expressed the community’s will, and binding milestones without which we cannot move forward. The only thing missing is what my team has essentially always lacked in three years here on Astar: a little support and trust.
Throughout this process, we have managed to change many people’s minds. While working, we have followed every piece of advice we received, and in the meantime, we have been one of the few teams consistently committed to developing here.
We kindly ask that you reevaluate our proposal here and let us know whether we can proceed with either option. Before moving onchain and spending another 1,000 Astar on a new proposal, we would greatly appreciate your feedback. Thank you.
You don’t need council support for this new proposal.
As mentioned before in the following discussion thread:
Once submitted, the proposal must go through governance approval, which can happen in one of two ways:
By the Main Council, for requests under 1 million ASTR (reference)
By ASTR token holders through a public referendum, for requests over 1 million ASTR
Since your request will exceed the 1M ASTR threshold, it must be approved via a public vote by token holders.
Since your new proposal is above 1M ASTR, you need a public vote by token holders. My evaluation as Main Council is not needed in this case.
Hi Maarten, thanks for your answer. We know we don’t need consensus. But since the last referendum, by your own admission, were “special,” and since we are a serious team developing and working, we wanted to know if there was any openness to this before moving forward with additional resources.
The proposal, like the old one, is divided into milestones. The milestones are delivered early each time and are less than 1 million astr.
The first will be about 400,000 astr, and so on with the others. When we vote on them, it will be after receiving them in advance.
Please, I ask you with an open heart: don’t make us suffer any more with processes that are unattainable before we can even begin.
There is a well-structured program; the referendum is not an option for anyone at the moment; it exists, but it’s as if it didn’t exist. It’s not fair that my team, with 93% of votes in favor, should be blocked by the will of one or two people. This isn’t democratic. Someone like you tried to avoid a bad outcome, but in the end it came to pass anyway. The council analyzed the first proposal and denied approval due to the “go to market” issue.
Today you tell me the proposal exceeds 1 million, but this wasn’t indicated for the first proposal.
Please, once again, we’ve demonstrated what we can do. The code is public, the data is reliable, the expansion to Soneium is planned, collaboration among multiple teams is also possible, the requested funds are released only after milestones are delivered… what else do we need to do?
Add to that the results of the last referendum… doesn’t it seem like my team has already suffered enough injustice in the last 3 years?
Opportunities have been given to everyone here; since the first dappstakingV3, we’ve been penalized and ignored for a handful of astars by the right support. We’re not blaming anyone, but is there a way for the council to move in the right direction with us, at least once?
Thank you
If you need my opinion, I will not support the grant towards NFT Bridges. Based on my observation, there is not demand for RMRK NFT on Soneium and no marketplace on Soneium that supports this standard, so why should Astar treasury pay for this bridge support?
Adding a VRF integration as part of a grant is strange because it will be on Soneium not on Astar (Astar doesn’t support Chainlink VRF), where this integration is not a new development; it’s just an implementation of an existing feature. Don’t know why Astar treasury should be for an implementation of a feature in Soneium.
I will not discuss work done by SFY, although I’m curious around the breakdown of ‘marketing campaigns’, not sure about your distribution channels and value add for this area but its sometime time only will tell.
I can answer the first part.
The game is structured to be compliant with the rmrk protocol or not.
The bridge on Soneium will only carry the main characters, who can be transferred from Astr to Soneium only if they have reached a certain onchain level and have a certain NFT teleport. In this case, the rmrk protocol acts as an onchain action validator on Astar, much better than any leaderboard on private servers. The game will continue to run on both Astar and Soneium; migration will be optional for those who also want to play on Soneium.
As for the technical side of the NFT Bridge, I’ll let them answer. Steven and Ilan discussed it in our last call, but it’s better if they answer @ilan . The additional request of $10,000 with a separate fourth milestone is entirely dedicated to their work.
@Gaius_sama has asked us to find collaborations within the ecosystem; we can do so with them or with other already active teams. The Astar Degens themselves will receive special in-game advantages from us for their support during the voting process.
Regarding marketing campaigns, as mentioned, we are open. Maximizing this treasury investment with online gaming will be very simple! There’s no single path to follow. We’re talking about explorable dungeons; the community can be enticed by special events, such as themed or timed events…
Communication with ambassadors and agents will be crucial!
The game has its own lore that can evolve on Astar and Soneium based on the community’s requests.
The rmrk protocol remains an added value but not necessarily mandatory. We ourselves have avoided adding composability to the game, leaving it optional only on the marketplace.
Onchain leveling will be fundamental and extremely democratic. Many think that games and NFTs are just entertainment, but instead, as mentioned many times, they can be a comprehensive tool for managing the community.
Give us a chance.
Hi, @Maarten
I was traveling the last few days and had very spotty internet while doing so.
That’s why I didn’t address your comment until today.
You are obviously entitled to your opinion, and it’s OK not to support a part of the overall proposal.
Just to clarify some things.
RMRK is actually an ERC-721 standard, to which all NFTs adhere. It adds another layer of complexity/capability to NFTs.
But the NFTs are ERC-721.
This is why we can bridge them, if needed.
We only need to extend the bridge to support the standard, not to rebuild it.
We are not representing @SFY_Labs in negotiations with NFT markets. Therefore, I will not address this aspect of the comment, but it is not so complex that it should render NFT markets unable to support the protocol.
Yes, Astar does not support VRF.
This is on Astar and Chainlink, not on us.
For whatever reason, the powers that be on these chains decided not to deploy VRF on Astar.
We can’t control it.
However, we can control which protocol we deploy our token on, and we did.
$TLPT is deployed on the CCT protocol (Cross-Chain Token) using Chainlink technology.
This means it can be deployed on any chain that supports the protocol.
The token can be easily and cheaply moved across chains and used natively on these chains without needing to swap, wrap, or perform any other action with it. It is just native on these chains.
Sneium decided to adapt this protocol, and NFT Bridges moved a large number of $TLPT to Soneium, which will use these for the VRF raffles we committed to hosting.
We would have loved to do these on Astar, but we can’t.
Because the token is a CCT token, we can provide these rewards natively on Soneium - A chain that Astar, for all intents and purposes, is merging with.
Providing the $TLPT rewards is a way for us to incentivise users to use our infrastructure and participate in the Bridge’s economy.
Yes - The rewards are on Soneium. Soneium is still closely related to Astar, and the collaboration between the two chains is very strong.
This is actually an excellent use case for the CCT protocol usage.
As a last point in this VERY long post -
We will be contributing 125 Ambassadors NFTs that will migrate to Astar and will be available for Astar users in the game.
These NFTs are the keys to the bridge’s economy, and you need them to join the DAO, receive monthly revenues from the bridge, and vote on proposals regarding the bridge’s growth and expansion.
These NFTs are native to Base, and we will bridge these 125 NFTs to Astar so they can become a part of the Age of Chronos gameplay.
In my opinion, we are offering a significant amount of value to Astar and the Age of Chronos, and I hope that our proposal will receive support.
Have a great weekend.
Ilan
If you need my opinion, I will not support the grant towards NFT Bridges.
Hi Maarten,
I just want to make absolutely clear that your feedback here was taken on board, and that’s exactly why this was pivoted. NFT Bridges found a solution with direct impact on Astar — creating a base bridge for their NFT collection and bringing it onto Astar for in-game use in Age of Chronos.
This means:
So rather than Astar paying for features on another chain, this is about onboarding an existing community directly into Astar and tying them into an ecosystem use case from day one.
The objective is to funnel everything to Astar, with the potential for onboarding future communities from different chains in the future.
Anyway, the new proposal thread has all the details as described above but i wanted you to know that the NFT Bridges offering is different now.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.