Please let me write my personal opinion here, not as a member of Starlay, but as one of the participants of the first IDO before joining Starlay team.
Starlay Finance will offer 1.5x LAY to all addresses participating in the second token sale. The decision trying to accept the whale investor has caused significant confusion in the community.
As Neo wrote above, I think it’s clear to me why the team is compensating second token sale participants. But what is the point of compensating first IDO participants specifically?
I have to admit that I’m also feeling uneasiness about the price of LAY at this moment. But a decline in token prices can occur in any token of any project on any chain at any time.
As one of LAY holders, No.2 and No.3 in this post make sense to me that the team is trying to compensate all LAY holders, including first IDO participants. So, as one of the participants, I didn’t feel from this post that the first IDO participants are being ignored.
Pleasure to hear any thoughts. Thank you.
P.S.
I believe you all three and the other participants of the first IDO (including myself) are the earliest supporters of Starlay. I hope we could support the product and the community together…
Again, this post is my personal opinion. Not as a member of Starlay. Thank you.
Thank you @usafmike
I am glad you are concerned. To show our strong commitment, we will use 100% ASTR to buy back LAY if we are not delisted from dApp Staking.
Morris, until now my TRUST still not yet recovered to Starlay, and I think others still feels the same like me. However, I appreciated that your team offering a proposal to give compensations for Astar community although from my PoV it’s a bit long to respond considering the nature of crypto world.
For these proposal some will agree, others will disagree. But if Starlay deliver the proposal successfully, then you can regain your trust from Astar community. Keep building!
Thank you for the comment @Kaizoku13. I wrote my personal opinion here about compensating the first IDO participants. Pleasure if I can hear your opinion about the post.
Again in my personal opinion, I don’t feel one year vesting period is too long… TheGraph sale was one year, NEAR protocol sale was 1-3 years vesting periods.
Thank you @souleater for the post. I think building trust takes a longer time than building DApps. But once we built a strong trust, I believe its robust as a DApp.
I wasn’t in crypto around at the time of DAO hacking. Just read through posts on Github and articles. The frozen fund of Polkadot was shocking news…
Those examples are big ones in the industry that Im afraid to refer to those with this Starlay Finance’s case. But still, thank you for your sincere comments.
I am a participant in the IDO and I agree with the 5 suggestions.
I know there are some who disagree, but please have faith and carry them out.
Starlay has an excellent UX/UI and I hope it will continue to develop.
Why is there 1.5x LAY compensation for the 2nd IDO and no compensation for the most affected 1st IDO?
This will not satisfy the 1st IDO participants who took more risk to join the IDO.
Wouldn’t it have been better to conduct the fixed price offering after the auction?
I think it would have been obvious that this result would have been achieved if the auction had been conducted immediately after the LUNA shock.
The most honest response for the community should be to return all 1st IDO participants with Astr.
What are @neo_defi thoughts?
If Starlay team is interested in applying for Astar’s treasury for the liquidity providing, please make a proposal and post it on this form (another thread)
@sota I think that all the points are already expressed, from my point of view, the Starlay team deceived their first investors, playing with the numbers and unreal APYs, moving the prices (for the IDO they raised it from 0.1 to 0.3, but for farming and after the first buyers they lowered it), the supposed whale that never existed, launching a useless product, without adding liquidity. I don’t know what more evidence you want, Starlay must be removed from dapp staking or this will affect Astar indirectly. I feel ripped off and supported by the Astar team who promoted too much this project.
I am a moderator of this forum. Whether delisting Starlay or not is not what I am going to decide. This will be decided by a poll conducted by our core team, ambassadors, and people who have more than trust level 3.
All you are doing is criticizing and this is not a constructive discussion. If you have a complaint, come up with a counter-proposal.
I will delete both your message and mine after 6 hours because this is irrelevant.
It is a simple question. Morris, who are you? Since it came out suddenly, I don’t know what it is. Why does your situation improve when you join the team? What kind of background do you have and what kind of things can you give back to the team in the future?
I don’t think you should delete the comments, since this shows the real picture of the situation, and not just leave nice comments, as long as no one is disrespected, I think we all give our point of view and disagreement. and I insist that I believe that the Starlay team should be removed from the dapp staking, all the actions mentioned above are not by mistake, they were done with all the intention. And by the way. I leave the link to my proposal that I hope someone can answer me. Starlay Finance dApp - #120 by kuasimoto
if this is acceptable to the participants of the first token sale, I think it is fine.
I think it is a good idea to increase the price of LAY by buying back LAY. But what does it mean to receive ASTRs from Astar’s Treasury to increase liquidity? You guys should have received a combined $2M from the two token sales, and even with the $4M ASTR for the LAY buyback, there should still be quite a bit left over. You should do as much as you can provide from your own funds.
if this does not bother your income, then good!
Astar is only a public blockchain and should not have much say in 1dApp. With that in mind, if you want input on important decisions, I think it’s fine. But what we should do more than that, in my opinion, is to confront the community.
The ASTAR ecosystem requires native lending protocol. This helps activate the whole ecosystem.
Starlay have the largest lending TVL in ASTAR.
It was clear that the core team could not sustain Lay’s price in the preliminary stage. The collapse of Lay prices will directly affect the entire lending system, which in turn will have an impact on the entire ASTAR ecosystem such as arthswap.
This money is more likely to contribute to ecosystem development than just a superficial grant.
I have not yet seen any opposition regarding #3. We are first going to use the dApp Staking rewards we have earned so far to buy back LAY. Does anyone disagree with me on this point? I’ll paste the transaction here after the operation.
Sorry for being late to reply. I was thinking about how I should reply to you.
Apologize if you’re not convinced. But this post by me and this post by Morris is all information we can disclose.
Will resources really be allocated for the community?
Yes, we will definitely be adding more members to interact and communicate with community members. We will keep you posted on Discord about new members and their roles.
Is this a trivial mistake that can be avoided without disclosing the circumstances or taking measures to prevent recurrence?
Not sure if it can be called trivial. However, this is an operational error. I am sure that by adding members to the team and organizing and preparing the operation before conducting them, we can prevent such mistakes in the future.
I hope that Starlay will continue to develop without letting the failures be forgotten and to make sincere improvements.
Will do our best.
Thank you for all posts you’ve done @wing_tail. Pleasure if we can move forward together.