Delist Arthswap From dApp Staking

Governance Offchain Discussions
1

From a technical and operational perspective, Arthswap shows limited contribution to the Astar ecosystem, with minimal on-chain activity and no clear reinvestment of ~$2,000/month from dApp Staking rewards.

Maintaining their platform likely costs no more than ~$30/month for hosting, plus an annual domain name expense of around $100, while the remaining operations are handled by smart contracts. The lack of transparency in reward utilization and engagement indicates a misalignment with the core objectives of dApp Staking, which is to support projects that actively drive innovation and deliver value to the ecosystem.

Given these factors, delisting Arthswap is recommended to better allocate resources to impactful projects.

1 Like
2

Thank you very much for the information. Each piece of information is quite useful. If possible, could we ask the team to update us on the roadmap or future plans? There might be things we can work on together. If not, we can consider according to the proposal, which would be fine too. =)

3

To be honest, this DEX has been around since Astar’s launch and has always fulfilled its role and objectives well. I’ve never had any issues using swaps, liquidity pools, etc.

It’s been a while since I last used the DEX, so it might be worth diving into the roadmap to understand the team’s plans. But overall, ARTHSWAP has delivered on what it set out to do.

4

Thank you, as always, for your valuable feedback and support. This is the ArthSwap team.

We have received comments such as:
“Aren’t you just receiving rewards without doing anything?”,
“Your contribution seems low,”,
and
“It’s hard to see your future roadmap.”

In response, we would like to share our current situation and future plans.

1. ArthSwap’s Role and Current Status

ArthSwap has been operating since the early launch phase of Astar Network, serving as the foundation for swapping and liquidity provision on Astar. While there hasn’t been explosive growth in trading volume or user numbers, we believe we function as an essential part of the infrastructure supporting the stability and continued growth of the network.

2. Necessity of dApp Staking Rewards

We currently allocate all swap fee revenue to liquidity providers and ARSW stakers, which effectively brings our project revenue to zero. Consequently, dApp Staking rewards play a critical role in covering our operating costs. To be frank, the current rewards are at the minimum level we need to maintain our operations.

Here are our main expense areas:

  • Cloud server fees
  • CI/CD, GitHub, and other platform costs
  • Development tools such as Subsquid
  • Development work and auditing costs, including those for security updates and new listings
  • Community management, user support, and other operational expenses

3. Future Policy and Roadmap

Moving forward, we will continue focusing on maintenance and stable operations rather than pursuing large-scale expansions. Rather than aiming to be a cutting-edge product with major innovations, we prioritize providing safe and stable basic functionalities on Astar.

That said, if there are opportunities such as collaborations with other projects or new developments like Sonieum’s progress, we will formulate and share updated roadmaps accordingly.

Thank you again for all your feedback. We will continue to operate steadily as a core infrastructure on the network.

1 Like
5

Here’s a response in the tone and style of your original message:

The explanations provided regarding your operational costs and contributions raise more questions than they answer.

1. Cloud Server Fees

Hosting a decentralized application incurs minimal costs, typically under $50/month for a project of your scale. Your claim of significant server expenses is highly questionable, given that smart contracts handle the majority of operations.

2. CI/CD, GitHub, and Development Tools

The tools you listed (e.g., GitHub, Subsquid) are either free, low-cost, or charge based on usage. With limited evidence of active development or frequent deployments, it’s unclear how these tools are incurring substantial expenses. Your CI/CD and GitHub activity logs would demonstrate whether these claims hold merit.

3. Development Work and Auditing Costs

You cite development and auditing as key expenses. However:

‱ When was the last audit conducted? Where are the reports?

‱ What significant development has been undertaken recently to justify ongoing costs?

The stagnation of your platform suggests minimal activity, making this claim appear unsubstantiated.

4. Community Management and User Support

Projects with limited community engagement and user activity typically have minimal costs in this area. Without evidence of substantial community initiatives or active user support operations, these claimed expenses seem inflated.

Conclusion

I understand that ArthSwap played an early role in Astar’s ecosystem, your current trajectory shows limited growth, minimal transparency, and a misalignment with dApp Staking’s objectives. Claiming that all your revenue goes to liquidity providers and ARSW stakers only highlights the inefficiency and lack of sustainability in your model.

The community deserves clarity:

‱ Where exactly are the dApp Staking rewards going?

‱ How are these funds driving growth or innovation in the ecosystem?

Your response fails to justify the ongoing allocation of rewards. Given the lack of transparency and measurable contributions, delisting ArthSwap remains the logical step to ensure these resources support impactful projects that align with Astar’s goals.

1 Like
6

Let me clarify the abstract usage of our cost.
Please note that these are merely guidelines and may vary from month to month.

  1. Cloud server fees: $50~$100
    ・We are also using this in internal dashboard.
  2. Dev tools: $300~600
    ・The majority of these costs are from Subsquid, which has previously been noted within the team as being expensive. One of the reasons is the additional expenses incurred on Astar zkEVM, but with the planned merger into Soneium, we would like to consider closing this as well.
  3. Development work and Auditing costs: $500~1,500
    ・Please understand that it’s challenging to reduce personnel here to zero while maintaining the continuity of the service.
    ・Recently, we worked jointly with Algem to list a new token, aASTR, create a pool, and prepare for a campaign (though it has not yet been released).
    ・Additionally, we regularly check activities, perform swaps, and provide liquidity ourselves to ensure the platform hasn’t been hacked, identify vulnerabilities, and confirm that no bugs have occurred.
    ・By the way, audit costs are one-time expenses, so they haven’t been included. We haven’t conducted any audits recently either.
  4. Community management and User support: $500~1,500
    ・Similarly, it’s not possible to reduce personnel here to zero.
    ・We provide support for usage inquiries and address minor errors or bug-related issues as they arise.
    ・Recently, we’ve been involved in marketing events such as GM campaign.
3 Likes