Delist skylab from dapp staking

Governance dApp Staking Applications
1

Since in this forum the democratic policy of discussing only when it is convenient and closing posts at will without any logical sense of imposing ideas that not everyone shares is in force:

I ask for the delisting of skylab for various reasons that I list below, even if from the answers received it is clear that a vote will not lead to any different result.

  1. the dapp has never developed or invested in research despite the large funds obtained in 15 months from its listing, on the integration of astr blockchain as required by the currently applicable legislation. This is the point that should lead to the delist as it is NOT DAPP, not a trivial point to discuss or verify by voting.
    The greatest lack of respect is not that of the team, which is right to take all the time possible and to earn as much as possible with the minimum possible expense, but of the people who should control this according to the regulations, namely the ambassadors. The rules must be respected and in theory there is no vote that should be done, there is no discussion on this. The core team or whoever performs this function should have long ago brought this shortcoming to light. They are supported by a member of the core team, the same one who closed the thread about their poor development, namely Ramz, who is the same one who supports them unconditionally, out of friendship or otherwise, I don’t care. There would be nothing wrong with that team developing according to the rules and not taking advantage that other teams were not granted (RIGHTLY)

  2. They have always said that developing a game takes time, very true. It is not true that you have to pass off assets purchased on third-party markets as yours, and use them as the main purpose of development. They exploit people’s ignorance in terms of “game development” to make people believe that everything they are doing is the result of enormous sacrifices, instead the first person who questioned all this brought to light with simple research and experience that the team usually merged and packaged existing things. In some cases there is nothing wrong with buying assets or AI to generate assets, but this cannot be the main product and especially in their case it cannot be, having in fact always used these assets as an “excuse” for not being able to work on blockchain integration YET. 3) They have been in UCG for the longest time possible (2 times) and never reported what they were doing in a timely manner (because there was nothing to report) and none of the ambassadors asked anything about it. Ucg provides for the use of milestones, have the milestones been reached? OF COURSE NOT.

They have their backs covered, so much so that they were even still in the UCG section after more than a year. (I hope without receiving funding, not know).

  1. They sold through Yoki additional nfts obviously generated with AI, in the best period of ASTAR (in value) cashing in a considerable amount, obviously without taking care of their integration into the game, they haven’t even decided yet which network to use, let alone choose where to mint these useless images… other assets generated with AI that will not have a sequel, and which have never been talked about again. This is always thanks to influential friends. I think that even in this case community funds were spent, and that many people in the moment of enthusiasm and rise of the astar token trusted to buy any capsule existing on the market even from the skylab team.
    On every nfts it’s write: it could unlock future rewards.
    real utility? none, still more promises. Who knows how long it will take here too.

    image
    image1249Ă—755 126 KB

  2. They professed a knowledge of the RMRK protocols that in reality they do not have. They are simple users of a simplified website for the mint, in fact when the rmrk team updated their protocols and made the minting of nft 2.0 via the website impossible, they no longer did what they had in mind, because in their team despite having raised thousands of dollars in the last year, they do not have a blockchain developer. They rely on the Tricky team occasionally apparently. To date the results are poor even for the migrations they proposed.
    There are only 6 nfts migrated. That’s all. :grin:

    image
    image1448Ă—647 114 KB

The migrated assets are not equippable, and it is not clear why, if not for technical lack. To avoid trouble they set the migration deadline in a few days and did everything manually. Many people evidently do not know anything and for them that is fine.

image
image1195Ă—887 91.7 KB

  1. They tried in the only answers provided on why there was no integration with astar after 15 months of dappstaking, to associate the migration of other assets, to the blockchain product of the skylab game. An attempt to evade the question on which other people then fossilized, trying to bring attention to this thing. This is a minor thing, that has nothing to do with the game. I hope it is clear to everyone, in any case it was not completed as planned.

  2. They talk about SONEIUM but forget that their integration will have to (if they follow what was proposed in the first proposal) also pass through the work of the RMRK team. There is currently no marketplace, nor will there be in the coming months, that can guarantee the correct buying and selling or even just the correct viewing of nfts 2.0 if not that of Singular. I am not even obviously hypothesizing their own marketplace, they clearly would not know where to put their hands, if they do not know how to do a migration, so that said, how can you be sure to develop this with the rmrk protocol? Mystery.

  3. They have never paid the stakers for what was promised. The airdrops were not carried out as they should have been, also helped by the poor participation of people in the ecosystem, in fact to date one of the biggest shortcomings of astar is precisely that of having a dappstaking where no one can lose anything even by betting and trusting certain scams. This makes the complaint of the end user almost excessive… in the meantime they have positioned themselves in a certain place and tier also thanks to those promises.

    image
    image690Ă—345 70.4 KB

Optional:
9) They do not have a github on which users or anyone interested can see the progress of the team. All the teams that actually develop something have public code, since after 15 months we are not yet talking about the blockchain product, which does not mean talking about the finished game but at least a phantom application of the protocol to it, it would be appropriate to have a dedicated github page.

Strange:
10) For more than a year they have always had the same amount of tokens in staking, the figure does not go up or down, clearly this makes you think about many things, the vote of a few, the support of influential people, which explain many things including the lack of control and the freedom to do whatever they want without being punished.
This rhymes with centralization.

To investigate:
11) If as admitted they delegated and purchased things with the funds received, while people believed that they were the main creators, including graphic assets and marketing assets such as music by the Japanese artist and more, this project was born practically as an empty box, made of promises and beautiful images. First the funds are collected and then savings are delegated. Everyone could create dapps in this way, and the background or what was built by serious teams would be something insignificant.
How will copyright be managed in this case? We are really at risk that the game could be created from assets that cannot be used in the context in which it will be distributed, and this on Soneium is a big problem as well as a huge embarrassment if it were to happen.

According to my calculations the team has raised a figure close to 100k dollars. they might be wrong but an analysis tool would be useful. Maybe someone can post it. Now they tell us that to make us happy, they will soon give us a simpler game (it will be another modded clone) of which however nothing has ever been mentioned or even expressed in the proposal for which they are listed and supported.
I don’t know about you but with these funds you can do a lot of things.
I don’t agree with @0xRamz idea of ​​unconditional support and I still wonder how attention and in-depth technical discussion can be diverted for so long without a person being emotionally and financially involved, as he wants us to believe. It doesn’t exist, there are serious shortcomings and answers are needed. He said that your goal is the best for astar, justify a team that has not produced even a simple mvp for more than 15 months and that by their own admission has not touched the protocol and today it was discovered that “in part” it uses basic assets of the platform on which it “develops”.

I have been asking these questions for over 2 months now. Not a short time
and there have been no answers, neither from the team nor from those who were in charge of the control.

There are no accusations, There are no untrue and unverified things. I hope I am not accused of hate or anything else and that I am answered on the merits.

I do not have the funds to make a proposal on subsquare at the moment, I hope that someone, perhaps an ambassador can do it for me, thank you.
You can use the link to this comment in the proposal, I think I have summarized all the most significant unanswered points.

1 Like
2

Thanks for partaking in the discussion. The previous discussion was closed - not deleted - as its was devolving into various separate discussions and topics with no order. There were various commentators also pointing this out. It was abundantly evident and not productive to what the end goal was: to get to the point of delisting or not the SkyLabs team from dapp staking.

The thread was back-linked in the new post I created. It also serves as not to continue the digression into just more “discussion”, and more as an action item i.e a 2 day period added to take a vote on sentiment to delist or not. I can make the delist proposal myself if thats what the community consensus sentiment vote calls for.

You can find that discussion here: ❇️ UCG: SkyLabs - Next Steps

As for “accusation and untrue or unverified things” - I respectfully disagree with you. Your comments and assumptions on and about Astar Agents/Ambassadors, Astar core-team members, and even in this post alluding to a possible “emotionally or financially” involvement from myself say otherwise. Your comments not only serve to grow distrust, sow fear and doubt, distort perspectives, and instigate, but its disingenuous to think comments like these are actually helping the team and community make decisions about changes and decide to involve themselves and tackle larger issues that arise. The continued effort on your behalf to tear down long time contributing members with baseless accusations and fabricated allusions is harmful for the motivation of new participation and involvement - not just from current community members, but future ones too.

One of the root issues at stake here is that exact oversight that was lacking and accountability for all dapps in regard to the UCG program, and we need more motivated and encouraged community members to participate, not less due to remarks like yours that plant disillusion. Hence I’d gladly respond to your constructive comments, and even push proposals myself on your behalf due to your lack of funds, if thats what the community consensus decides. But please know that any more false assumptions and/or remarks in your comments that aim to demotivate, plant distrust towards long time contributors, agents, and team members will be ignore by me. There are respectful ways to have a constructive discussions without the need for any of that, and happy to partake in those.

**End note

For any ASTR holder here reading, and open to making governance proposals: The linked SkyLabs thread’s end goal is to capture some sort of sentiment anonymously from onlookers and readers to try to capture community consensus, but it doesn’t need to go that route. Any user at anytime can create a delisting proposal prior to that sentiment vote I called for.

Thanks for reading and participating.

3

do you think that the questions you asked and the answers you received really summarize all the problems that have come to light? they really seem few and yet another joke in my opinion. probably the answers are even worse than the questions. does it seem to you that this controversy was triggered only because of the problems you highlighted? Once again you only talk about UCG, I highlighted 11 different points in order of severity. Given the amount of points I have clearly specified, can they be added to your thread or do we risk being accused of hatred and starting over again with the insults?

Regarding the Astar agents who, as I specified in my note, are the worst aspect of the whole affair and are exactly the reason for my note. I hate discrimination and when in the same place where there are specific rules, distinctions are made without motivations that collect the values ​​for which you and the Astar team apparently fight in every post you publish, while in this case you seem to largely overlook pretending not to understand for more than 15 months and that have led to a corrupt dappstaking demonstrated in several sensational episodes. Do you think that mine are hate attacks only because they refer to them? There are only common roles and interests that confirm in several cases the bad faith, your interference and your defense of the team and as already written the poverty of the questions you have just summarized after months of discussion certifies in my opinion the accommodation you have towards them. These people, including you, not only perform their role badly, they are fundamental to the bad conduct of dapps and are also paid for it. what’s worse? a discussion was created about it, because it’s something related to the problem we had with Skylab but not only that, it applies to everyone and do you know what happened? no one answered honestly about it, there were basically two or three accusers and all ambassadors who supported each other. the system is fine like this for the majority of people, even if it doesn’t match the current rules they wrote and especially with ethics. the final result of all this is a dappstaking that has been active for more than two years and not even a fucking dapp that is really an added value to the ecosystem. you should ask yourself as a member of the core team, why, what more you can do and above all if it’s the case to put a stop to all this, instead you feel unfairly accused by a person who at this moment unlike any other who will write here is earning absolutely nothing from it.

4

Hi @Zorounashi

To give you more data for better accuracy in your post, Skylabs was part of the UCG program from August 28, 2023 to November 28 for the first round and reapplied to join again from January 1, 2024 to April 1, 2024. UCG tokens were staked respectively over these periods.

Since April 2024, the tokens have been permanently unstaked and SkyLab has no longer earned any rewards from this grant.

You can find more details in this document for the UCG program during the year 2023 :

It’s true that they’re still classified as UCG on the portal, but this is simply a matter of not updating their category and it doesn’t correspond to any additional rewards so far.

I’m not commenting on the proposal itself as I don’t have a strong opinion yet and will decide based on the discussion here and this will be reflected in my vote on Astar Governance once the delisting proposal has been created.

Thank you

5

Thanks @Gaius_sama for the clarification, it was as I imagined, still wrong but at least no further funds were given. :+1:

In any case, your intervention on the matter would be appreciated, you have been very tough and a good controller in the past with other teams. You have analyzed the regulation and specified that a migration of NFTs is not a prerequisite for listing as a blockchain product, SkyLab has made it its prerequisite from August 2023 to today, having passed through 2 ucg and various other forms of funding, and do it only now (with 6 asset migrate… a lot of ONCHAIN TX… what a benefit for ASTAR!)

It is very strange to find such a quantity of dapps outside the main regulation not being sanctioned or excluded. I remember that since migration was not foreseen in the regulation, the vote for the listing did not even start. Something against the regulation could not be voted on.
Not being in line with the regulation (for a year then) should lead to exclusion without even voting, there is not much to discuss, it would be interesting to know what you think. :grinning:

6

It’s true that my principles are to enforce the rules when joining dApp Staking for new projects because I don’t want projects that bring no value to the ecosystem to start earning rewards and add selling pressure to the token.

I intend to enforce these rules for new applications, however, as members of the core team, I don’t want to take on this role when it comes to projects already listed in dApp Staking (and listed long before I joined the team), as I expect the community to do this and don’t want them to believe they can rely on the foundation to do it all. We’re aiming to build an ecosystem, a collective, and so everyone needs to get involved as much as they can and contribute, not passively wait for others to take action.

For Donkey Gang, it was in the case of a new application or reapplication if I remember correctly. However, that’s not the topic here, so there’s no need to continue the conversation on that point.

Since proposals to remove projects from dApp Staking are finally being opened up by community members, I’ll stick to my principles and apply them to projects that I feel don’t bring value to Astar. Honestly, I haven’t yet investigated SkyLab long enough to make my decision, but based on your arguments, given that they only have one NFT collection on Astar, I would support delisting. However, I’ll wait for the team to respond to your points before making my final decision.

7

It seems to me an dishonest answer. that masks gaps.
Your sentences are all correct if taken out of context, but you mask your flawed intervention only because SKYLAB was already listed.

So the question is this, when it was listed you were there too, who controlled donkey gang and others after, why didn’t you consider the problem that the team didn’t even have any blockchain product in development? Nor did you demand its implementation as you did with others.

I can’t understand why the pre-post listing time phase, a bit like AC/DC, should be a barrier to your control.

If I insult you heavily today, you will throw me out of the forum by regulation. The registered dapps have submitted to a regulation, this dapp has been earning thousands of dollars since August 2023 without having conceded anything, it was even in default with a simple migration (which is not the blockchain product) for over a year, all against the main rules. I’ll do a search if you behaved this way also for other dapps already listed or you pushed for the delist.

Don’t feel offended and attacked, I’m trying to understand the difference between episodes that honestly seem IDENTICAL to me.

1 Like
8

I won’t answer this question any further, as it concerns myself and my position in governance and is not related to the current topic of discussion: SkyLab’s delisting.

I’ll wait for the SkyLab team’s response before making my decision.

1 Like
9

Classic.
I hope that in the end you will give your opinion publicly on skylab, whether with a vote or before. I am interested in this.
The closed attitude highlights as always, putting oneself and clear mistakes of the past before logic only for matters of personal principle. But this is part of the fallacious human logic, probably I will also be wrong in some cases. Thanks for the intervention.

10

Interesting topic that will surely help the evaluation of metrics for the next dApps or participants in the UCG.
In my opinion, not necessarily every project must have the game or their idea developed onchain (also because I believe that games totally on chain are even more difficult to develop) from my point of view I prefer to base my opinion on the facts and deadlines mentioned in the roadmap. In the case of Sky labs I would prefer to wait for one last month and give a last chance to see if they will actually keep their promises, that is monthly recap starting from January or the demo that should arrive shortly.
At the moment I am for the delisting of the dApp and if we go directly to the on chain vote I will vote for the delisting.

11

:joy: :joy: :joy: :joy: :joy: :joy: :joy: :joy:

@VasaKing In the past you have forced sensational actions such as making support for a serious team void for 100k astar of staking missing from one day to the next and now you come to tell me that it is NOT CERTAIN…

Why should this team, after having already had a good 15 months to get in order, have more opportunities than others who are being delisted right now or those who have been delisted in the past? What is the element that makes you so good and why do you want to grant an additional month? We have been talking about these things for more than 2 months. It has been quite in-depth and the team has made it clear that they are not even capable of doing a migration, which is very serious (The migration continues not to be the product of the proposal)

@Maarten

12

Why the tag?
This delisting proposal is waiting to be changed to a public proposal and moved to community voting when reaching referenda phase. No need to keep repeating the same things in every reply.

@Zorounashi or @SFY_Labs can create the public proposal at any time and share the link here so community can add their support.

Please use: https://astar.subsquare.io

13

I was hoping you could read the ambassadors’ responses and understand how things work here, since you can’t be always there.

14

Apparently we are no longer allowed to post further research on the Skylab dapp in the reference post.
Messages are deleted quickly. This is the censorship that is used by those who do not accept other people’s ideas and continually try to associate them with non-community toxicity in an attempt to shut them down. In 2025 this is very simple. Technology helps.

The toxicity is actually that of endorsing incorrect attitudes of other teams to the detriment of the community (because the funds are COMMUNITY)
in order not to admit personal shortcomings such as that of control.
This is the last message we will write about Astar Dapp Staking, about dapps and about improving an obviously and clearly corrupt system.

A team that admits through its founder that it does not meet the requirements to be listed as a dapp

and at the same time it has been funded since August 2023 thanks to the use of just 1 massive wallet of 30 million astar, even if it publicly tells us that it has an incredible and large community:

and who publicly admits to using the funds received from dapp staking for everything related to graphic creation, in fact buying assets on secondary markets (and remember that in the UCG they claimed the opposite, saying that they were super busy in this work, therefore lying there too)

it is not even worth discussing.

There are many other stories to tell, there would be many things to say. Unfortunately, all the actions that the majority of people hate in the real world are being copied, with the aggravating factor of being somehow protected by technological ignorance and not only by users.

Astar Community is distant from us developers for an obvious reason.
Not understanding it and continuing to profess acts of faith towards decentralization only as a nice word to say and then acting contrary to what is professed is mortifying.

It was obvious that the economic incentives would have moved many people and created incredible stories, but we didn’t think it would get to this point.

good continuation, in the hope that this post will not be deleted.

1 Like
15

Delisting proposal is live, because of duplicated thread, this one will be closed.

1 Like
16

Duplicated thread