@Maarten , we told you and also @sota in private: unfortunately there are people who have abused their role several times, putting their personal ideas and in some cases, feelings of hatred before tangible problems just because they don’t understand what it means being a developer. There are too many ambassadors who have double roles or are involved in other projects who are playing a dirty game in our opinion. And I won’t say anything else. The cake is small for everyone.
SFY was your collaborator since 2021, we didn’t deserve this treatment.
I prefer to think of it as a lack of communication and not something intentional, I understand that you all have numerous things to think about but we spent 2 months struggling here before making a difficult decision. An ambassador responding to a dev on how his job should be done is something truly ridiculous. An ambassador will never be able to understand that behind SFY’s fight on the astar forum there were economic problems for a support that from one day to the next became equal to 0, due to decisions taken by NON -DEV. Work doesn’t pay off just with nice words.
We invested 100% of our efforts in this community, getting ridiculed several times. The ideas of those who responded to our posts were personal and they all tried to pass them off as if they were written rules. The latest invention is that UCG is for dapps not deployed on astar while dapp staking which is a clearly inferior measure in terms of immediate support, can only be applied to those who already have a dapp on astar. How can something like this be possible and above all where is this written? We reread Gaius’ entire post on UCG 3 times and found no reference, we came to the conclusion that it is yet another interpretation of the rules. Also because he doesn’t have, once again, logical sense. Just as the subdivision by tier made by people who have nothing to do with the real problems of a dev and accepted unconditionally without a real vote on the matter makes no logical sense. Don’t talk about decentralization please.
Are small-medium developers arriving in the latest one? If you are no longer interested in them you should have said so or put specific deadlines on the guaranteed support. We trusted you and invested, hired new people, because we knew that dapp staking supported us for a total of 100… and it could have been a little less… but never reaching 0 as it was. Many have written that dapp staking should not be seen as the first resource for a team, but only as a help. And where is this rule written? Another interpretation. If before proposing a project I consult with the Astar team and I know I can count on a support value of just a help and not the core of my project? To astar this, in case of success of the dapp, wouldn’t it be a further value to demonstrate?
Control of dapps was and still is non-existent!
Did those who benefited from the UCG make periodic reports as agreed? Shall we check together, Maarten? We have already done it.
When it comes to judging what we write, they are all so precise, punctual. We go around the mere words of not arriving at a solution (this request on donkey gang dao is an example, just read how the post developed), when instead we have to write to a team that hasn’t reported for months and who never went into the specifics of how the astar network will be used in their dapp, everyone seems to have become accommodating.
There are 2 types of teams:
- Those who fight and achieve results, and who are not afraid to express sincere opinions
-Those who only have interactions with nice words, little hearts and many clichés about how beautiful the community is and how collaborative it is in every aspect.
Just a means to achieve the economic incentive.
Sir, but we would like to know more about what you are developing…
where’s the meat?
It is clear and statistically proven that the 2nd type of team has an easier life here, but they have just false interactions, and everyone understands this.
We have seen many developers who you now idolize, not writing anything for more than 1 year on their social channels, wake up people!
We are poisoned by the situation, in the last 3 months we have worked 24 hours a day to be able to have a playable MVP with all the ideas we have written. And we succeeded thanks to Moonbeam who had never had any dealings with us before then, unlike you, simply because they understood what we were proposing and why.
6 months ago many devs on dotsama aspired to develop something on astar, the incentives were high. Today it is a privilege for a few, friends of friends and the first filter is the personal ideas of the ambassadors, who attack or turn a blind eye when necessary. This principle applies almost everywhere, it is clear, but no one advertises something like dapp staking like Astar does, that is precisely the difference. today it is a good marketing operation, yes.
The reasons why this thing doesn’t weigh on other teams like it does on us are essentially 3:
- The team does not develop seriously and has 0 costs
- the team is already so large that it can do everything independently and if there is dapp staking it is just an additional income
- The team is already part of much higher tiers, both in terms of personal skills and because it has the support of people who count in the community.
The real problem for you is that the last team that should have been penalized was SFY, we won’t give up. We don’t do it as we have demonstrated by developing a finished structure of our dapp in just 3 months and we don’t do it if we need to have our rights guaranteed.
Our dapp is visible to everyone today. No tricks, no deception as some speculated months ago. The added value would have been incredible, and I would venture to say that no one is currently doing such a thing or has any plans to do so. Have a chat with the RMRK team if you want. There was no technical reason not to have done it on astar in the past, and there was no technical reason even today if a rapprochement had been achieved, through a new, less demanding dapp, which in any case could have been a way to keep a open channel.
Furthermore, also leaves us with one last personal thought, which may be wrong, but when there are so many problems, you start to think many things:
We understood that one of the problems that put our team in a bad light are NFTs.
The connection we have with the rmrk team and the standards we use are clear to everyone. Unfortunately we note that there are other marketplaces that are more supported and with which the core team perhaps shares more objectives, perhaps simply of an economic-marketing nature.
The type of standards we use would make our nfts inappropriate in any other marketplace, those of Age Of Chronos not even trivially viewable… You had a technical discussion with us months ago in private, where we provided our graphics to some members of the team, you know how we feel about it.
We don’t want to go any further, we have received nothing from our activity on astar other than economic damage given the reimbursement made to all those who purchased the incubators and an average price almost triple.
It is not possible that many consider SFY to be a serious team and only the Astar core team suddenly considered that this is no longer the case.
Unfortunately you no longer have time to manage these things, but you should inform yourself better about how the people you have delegated are managing things.
This post, as it always has been in recent months, will not lead to anything useful for us, we already know this, we are used to it by now.
