LOL there is no regulation… The community will not be rugged by teams asking for something, not executing it. That’s my point.
If the community vote to SFY Labs to stay on dApp staking it will happen… it’s simple.
But the TEAM said by themselves they are not interested anymore on ASTR rewards from dApp stkaing so… we can make this topic more productive and stop arguing about something SFY Labs do not care about anymore.
Good Luck on Moonbeam!
LOL … OK, I understand !! 
Thank you. 
ok no problem, it was just an attempt at compromise. But if these are the rules, no problem.
VERY BAD. that’s all, and we and also other team and also other memeber of the community have the same thought. DappStaking will evolve for the better but for now that’s how it is. The Tier system is embarrassing
Who are you referring to? I hope not to us.
If there is anyone who has been scammed in this whole affair it is us, we have decided to believe after all that we were just unlucky in having a “particular” position.
We are no longer interested in producing a web3 game with 66 astars per era as support just because we have not reached an arbitrary tier for a few astars (dropping to -95%), simply because we are not masochists and we must protect our community which in any case supported us with almost 15 millions of Astar, paradoxically, these people have not been protected in the slightest by those who manage the Astar community and by those who created this dappstaking v3.
This is the simple truth. Let’s go ahead and end this farce.
I cannot get Your point @naoyo4. How can we have a clear regulation and clear instructions without different situations like this one and the ones we had before? In my opinion every situation was different (Arthswap,Starlay and Sirius as well). We as a community, need to discuss constructively about it and decide the best for both involved parties , users and developers.
You assume the result of this proposal will be a ban but in my opinion You are wrong. Let the community decide what is the best.
What exactly is the opposite direction of good communication, from every comment You leave looks like You are better and even bigger than Astar itself. I’m glad to hear You find a better blockchain and ecosystem which suits SFY Labs.
Cannot agree more
So technically the community should decide in a constructive way what is best also for the rules themselves for dapp staking rewards?
Is this happening? When SFY brought to light a real problem where a team with a promise of support goes from earning 95% less than the previous day without logic or a mathematical relationship compared to other dapps able to support this reduction, it was done something immediately?
The truth is that @naoyo4 is right! There is no regulation about it and you should work WITH THE TIMES you need, i.e. very long for correct work and receiving votes from the entire community and not from 4 ambassadors to create a clear regulation on the delist.
Just as you are unable to change the v3 staking dapp on the fly
(This is what you ambassadors and the core team have been telling us for months…it takes time!!) not caring about the immediate needs of those you welcomed with a promise of support, which was not respected.
So much useless chatter, just to protect a system that has failed in the short term. I don’t know who voted positively for the v3 staking dapp but it has huge problems!
The story is simple and we repeat it for the millionth time:
1)SFY has a development idea
2) before getting involved you receive tables and projections on what the support given by the dapp staking system can be. It evaluates the numbers of its personal holder community and manages to reach 6 million Astars in staking with rewards of around 500 ASTARs x era
3) consequently accelerates development by hiring two professionals who become part of the team
4) a few weeks later, with a view to dapp staking, v3 triples the numbers of holders and Astars in staking.
5)The rewards for the work to be done which had been supported by the astar community in a very positive way (including you amabssadors)
they go from 1500 astar (of the v2 model) to 66 astar.
We are talking about a ratio of -95%.
Now I don’t know about you but mathematics is not an opinion.
This isn’t a cut to the v2’s disproportionate support, this is basically a delist of the dapp. SFY’s work is documented, much of what we will finish on Moonbeam started on Astar, so by the time it’s finished the dot will no longer be “SFY didn’t deliver”. The point will be Astar did not support SFY after the promise made at the time of the listing.
There is no protection of our work, we have not been able to pay the professionals correctly. Easy to speak for you when you don’t have a business to carry on and people to pay dear Vasa.
The change of network was made necessary for the survival of the project and not on a mere whim.
And an equally important team drew different conclusions.
All this fury towards us on your part is ridiculous.
And stop making personal interpretations of what dappstaking should be. Dapp staking has been defined here. We were attracted by the promise of the following: dApp Staking Overview | Astar Docs
"dApp Staking is Astar’s unique mechanism to financially incentivise developers who build decentralized applications (dApps). By engaging in dApp staking, developers can receive a basic income, which allows them to continue building and enhancing their dApps. Moreover, it allows to build a strong relationship between developers, stakers and users of dApps, where everyone is rewarded.
** Unlike traditional approaches where dApp developers need to rely on grant programs, token issuance, and fundraising efforts to generate income, dApp staking on Astar/Shiden provides developers with a basic income. As long as a dApp has been nominated, developers can receive a steady stream of rewards."**
We don’t consider ourselves above anyone! stop blaming us.
As long as we have worked on the network we are Astar as you are too.
For Astar we have certainly done a greater and more positive job than what you have done and we have done it for years, that for the sole title of being ambassador you think you can offend anyone who is not in line with a stupid system that we repeat again : WILL CHANGE’.
We are not clashing with Astar, we are clashing and fighting for the definition of a mathematically and ideologically wrong system. We brought our experience on the matter and the only answers on the matter were given by a few ambassadors who in the Astar world are worth as much as we or other developers can be worth. Astar grows if problems are taken into consideration and resolved, not if they are hidden under a carpet.
We are starting to think that the problem is the current work of the Ambassadors.
Instead of approving any project requested, they should do a job of checking the work of the various teams, request the setting of milestones and that they be respected, but this requires a lot of time and work, much better to discredit the work of others with sarcastic posts .
This is our last post.
Shame on you
Stop offending users , this is offensive and I don’t like it at all.
Same here , You are doing the same as me ignoring the rest of the Community.
Never done and never will do , read again my messages.
Second offence
This lead me to ask moderators when the voting actually can start. I cannot accept anymore this toxic behavior @Maarten @Gaius_sama
I tweeted several times to support, I’m not a KoL but I spread ur project info to my followers and to those who staked ASTR in my local community. I also staked a portion to you since early v3. But to be honest, I disappointed with your recent messages here, blaming the tier mechanism while if you follow from the very start v3 itself is a way of Astar Network can filtered out which project is alive and which is not.
I’m not offended by your move to go to Moonbeam. As a game-based project, I totally understand that you need to grew your userbase and in web3 situation currently, the need to expand to many chains. But the attitude and keep blaming the tier mechanism is very annoying. While the tier mechanism isn’t a perfect solution, but it is the best way atm to keep our network alive in the midst of fierce competition in smart contract sector. Also you knew the risk of developing a game based project in web3 especially the complex one like AoC means u need to double your effort doing many things. You guys feel free to say bad words or negative things regarding Astar, but always remember that we once support your project. If I were you, I better say thanks to Astar community for supporting especially during bear time. where fundraising is almost impossible.
Good luck on your journey.
We answer you, because you deserve this, since we remember your support in the past, so first of all thank you.
Dapp staking v3 is wrong, there is no harm in stating this, and even doing so repeatedly. Why are there already mechanisms in place to change it otherwise?
Dapp staking v3 brought our support to a level of 0 and definitely killed our enthusiasm when we saw other dapps that had very few extra astars being funded quite decently. Our problem will make astar grow in future evaluations (in fact it is already doing so), we fought to be listened to by the community, but this did not help.
Being at 14.9m star and being paid 12 times less than a dapp that has 100k more than you and equally compared to one that has only 1 staker is shameful.
What do you see as meritocratic in all this?
If a system is wrong, it is wrong. Why shouldn’t we challenge it where it is appropriate, namely here? Is there anyone taking advantage of this system? I don’t think so, at least I hope not. So what do you want to protect if not a bad job? The statistics on new requests for dapp staking speak for themselves. v3 fixed some things and broke many others.
We have always reciprocated the support of the Astar team, with work and participation and we have always thanked them for this. ALWAYS.
At bear market we brought our small community to learn about astar and interact with the network. It’s precisely because there was this collaboration that things didn’t have to go this way. We have demonstrated our professionalism with facts over time.
What the management of dapp staking v3 was is mathematically refutable. this system still today provides for inconsistencies that only highly supported teams, or others that do not develop and therefore have no disadvantages and costs, can accept. Anyone who sees dapp staking as it has been proposed, i.e. self-financing of dapps, knows that today it is on the wrong path.
Continuing to blame us for what we report is equally shameful. A team of 9 people didn’t receive rewards for 4 months. And here we talk about what is correct or not to write on this forum.
Our team like many others worthy of support had to be supported in some way until a new solution was made with a new update.
The mood of the ambassadors should be different, instead of protecting the ecosystem with blind faith, they should protect the ecosystem with serious work to protect the developers, and at the same time serious work of CONTROL.
Something that we don’t see today.
None of you have suffered the damage that my team and the stakers who voted for us have suffered over the last few months. Before defining our behaviors, think about it very carefully.
We are not against the delisting of our dapp, I hope we have clarified this well. For us it can also be delisted immediately.
We are just repeating what we said in recent months and motivating the strategic change. Unfortunately it was made necessary to survive. We certainly wouldn’t have told our holders to wait an indefinite time before having a delivery date.
In any case, thank you for your words and support @souleater
i didnt know about your team, but at least you should have a marketing people who focused on promotion/sales, to be honest a company cant just build product without promoting it.
The truth is interesting everything you have pointed out, but at the time I can attest that I made some recommendations to the team here in the forum, that was about two months, you just can not lower your arms to go to another network, unfortunately you may be right in some respects but in others not so much, the ambassadors always support them, maybe you expected something more from the core team but they do not impose the rules of the game, the community imposes it with V3.
You just can’t whine and move to another network, you must stand firm as I said long ago and look for feasible alternatives to finance the developments, I know projects that without any funding have achieved great things, maybe they simply got tired of Astar and decided to leave, but they can’t forget what Astar gave them before V3.
There are many ways to move forward, leaving was their best option, I am glad for that, but if they are not going to do enough in Astar from now on it is better to vote for them to be delisted from V3.
Some time ago I also told them that they had a great project in their hands, maybe they should start with a simpler development and then move to the big leagues, the important thing is always to have a functional product that can scale, I wish them luck guys.
Hi @Vangardem you are another person who deserves a response.
You have always been very clear in understanding things, and your compliments make us happy, perhaps because you have known us for much longer than others.
So thank you.
The real problem is that we have used dappstaking v2 for a few weeks and we have been stuck at 14,970 million astar for about 3 months. A comment above, as you can see, puts the blame for the lack of marketing on us. Unfortunately, we are talking about things that are not true here. With even just tier 3 funds, we would have delivered rewards to our stakers that were superior to those of anyone else, even in the Astar token itself. A campaign no less than others was carried out and receiving the attention of 208 stakers with almost 15 million is not a trivial thing. But unfortunately we don’t succeed in these conditions, with a team that has to remain still, we don’t know how long we can resist! We need to pay for development.
If we had stayed to develop on Astar until the next Voting period, we would have lost all our current stakers who are still there only because there is a bonus to redeem. This is another problem with this mechanism, if you vote, and you vote badly, you reward the wrong dapps more instead of dapps listed later, and this is something that goes against our interests! It is not possible that even after the delist and reward change proposal, all our stakers are still there. This means that either v3 failed in terms of “interaction and promotion” of the teams (maybe) or it failed because the bonus reward at the end of build&earn is worth more than what the individual dapps recognize to the stakers as rewards (of whatever type they are )
We thank you, we will need good luck, as you can see we have never stopped, Age Of Chronos will be a game that will evolve with the most innovative standards the first animated and equipable 3D collection in history. We are testing this, not other teams, although there are many who come from where we come from, Singular-RMRK is actively working with SFY, our devs and graphics have been actively working with theirs every day for months to get to a result.
Our graphic designers have incredible experience, we could have blown smoke on our work, and shown things that didn’t yet exist or were untested. Use assets not created by us, or buy an emulator game directly and give external rewards, like many others do, and do it damn well. But we didn’t do it because we are serious and this message UNFORTUNATELY did not get through. The entire process of creating a truly web3 game requires study and answers that we feel we have given to the community in the proposal phase. We felt damn uncomfortable and overexposed when the economic support collapsed within a very short time of our listing.
Very little was needed to arrive at a solution and make our team feel in a comfortable environment, at “home”. The hate speeches and the constant circling around the problem made us consider that our work was probably not appreciated.
We feel sorry for people like you who have always shown us support and for the people in our community who from tomorrow will find themselves aiming their Astars at more worthy projects.
It’s a shame that we’re losing an innovative project such as AOC, and instead of the ambassadors / admins / community realising this, they are not responding to valid points raised.
Every valid and intellectual point raised by AOC has been ignored - discussion is not constructive or insightful here.
dApp staking v3 is a failure - unfortunately i fear we will lose more innovative projects to Moonbeam into the future.
People here don’t realise this - MB are paying AOC to deliver on their chain instead. There is value here and this will happen with more projects in the future.
There are definitely grifter projects receiving dApp staking rewards right now in high tiers, and there is also definitely a bias that exists for some projects and this is the general consensus from various chats i have seen.
It’s disheartening to see the road Astar Network is on and i’ve been here since Day 1. It’s also being reflected in token price / performance currently in my opinion.
I would also love to see more required transparency for higher tier projects - the higher the tier the more transparency required. “The community decides” is not a good response here - they follow the greatest incentive on offer and not necessarily best project to stake with. The rewards are way too concentrated with tier 1 and 2 and we are getting little / no benefit for it
The vote is open and will last 5 days. Forum members with a minimum trust level of 2 can vote.
Thank you for your appreciation of our project. The focus of the discussion has been shifting to SFY’s behavior for 3 months. There are Ambassadors who, even in this discussion, have shown hatred towards us for the simple reason of having been honest in our assessments. Honesty which is already leading to changes and re-evaluations of dapp staking which certify that our “complaints” are essentially right. What we couldn’t have was time. We cannot not pay those who are actively working on the project for 3 months. If our proposal had not been liked or had not been actively supported by 14.9 million Astars and more than 200 stakers, we would have accepted the will of the community, but given that the project exists, and the community has been positively in favor of it , why should we accept earning 5000 astars of rewards in 3 months (which do not even repay the costs of the indexter that we used to send the rewards every day to all the stakers, much less the quantity of Nfts already airdropped in the past months) while those who have very few astar more than us and perhaps fewer stakers received around 72,000 in tier 3? This ratio applies to each tier and both for those who are part of the maximum threshold and for those who are part of the minimum threshold, it is a random barrier that brings no benefit to both the developers and Astar itself because the quantity of Astar burned is insignificant than losing any serious projects. With this system, positions are blocked for 4 months after the voting phase and it is not true that the build & earn helps to raise funds as demonstrated. The positions of all dapps are essentially at a standstill, apart from rare sporadic cases, from the voting phase. This did not even allow promising doubles and I’ll give an example like VeryLongSwap to reach the figures we achieved, who stopped the project 1 month ago now as per communication. what does it mean? that people are essentially interested in earning astar and that they are more interested in the bonus than in supporting the dapps that perhaps arrive after the first voting phase. And we gave you an example that goes against our interests in this case! no one can predict everything, you can’t expect perfection, and each team’s needs may be different, but the fact that the current v3 creates too many problems for teams is clear!
Voted YES
if it is not possible to change the proposal or wait for the financing times, that is right.
Great to see this proposal. SFY has been in the ecosystem for long, now, i think it would be nice to get them delisted from the dApp store since they no longer want to continue adding value to the community. We appreciate their support so far.
Thank you 
It makes sense if the team decides to no longer work on the Astar side. However, it’s always important to understand the reasons why a project might choose to leave our ecosystem.
