Thanks for your intervention.
We leave due to lack of development support.
If, absurdly, the rewards of the staking dapp v2 would have been cut in half, today our dapp, based on the Astars collected, would earn 660 Astars x ERA.
With v3 the excessive expenses of v2 have not been reduced (even a 50% cut would keep support alive)
but some teams were excluded based on arbitrary choices.
This was not done out of malice, or choice.
But a series of bad technical choices led to this. In fact, our 14.9 million stakers are worth much less than the 15 of the dapp before us, and the economic power of the two teams on equal terms after a certain period will be completely different.
We can also agree on the fact that v2, especially for those who collected a lot of Astars, was extremely generous as a rewards system, but you canât make a team stop earning money and say âyou deserve a tipâ
Sorry to hear about your departure. I voted yes since it seems your team has already decided to join Moonbeam. On one hand, I feel sad that your team, which has been part of the Astar network for a long time, has decided to leave. The entire community values your contributions and hard work, and I believe the Astar community also wants to support development and efforts from different teams. On the other hand, Astar dApp staking is decentralized, with any project being decided by community votes. They stake Astar tokens in their favorite dApps, and typically, teams that have been in Astar longer build a reputation and receive more support. I think we should focus on solving the problem. If there are any good suggestions, you should post them in the forum and ask the community to vote. That would be a better way to communicate.
The ACTION of Staking on dapps is the only decentralized thing about dappstaking. Unfortunately then there is the setting of random tiers and thresholds that have not been designed well, and which are the result of the minds of a few. Regardless of the votes that the proposal may have received in the past (I assume very few, certainly fewer than those who voted for the AGE OF CHRONOS dapp). The tier makes the vote on AGE OF CHRONOS less important than other dapps, even those that received very little more. So one of our stakers who has bet on our dapp will support the dapp in a less powerful way than others. And this is not right.
So letâs leave the word decentralization at home, and letâs be honest with each other, thereâs no harm in admitting a problem. Itâs no oneâs fault, not even SFY.
The proposals have been made, some will be taken into consideration, others less so. However, letâs avoid saying banalities or casual phrases like this one about decentralization. The v2 was much more decentralized than the v3, despite the problems of excessive rewards, it was linear and 1 vote was 1 vote. Today we are witnessing something completely different. The rewards problem could be addressed with significant cuts, and with tiers that did not impact the rewards of the dapps, but on the constraints that they had to have, such as:
tier 10 million-30 million - âyou are forced to submit weekly reports where you will prove that you have achieved pre-established milestonesâ
Stuff like this encourages development and maximizes rewards investment.
The higher the tier and in general astar collected, the more constraints the dapp teams should have towards the community.
The more money you earn, the more you have to prove you deserve it.
Just an idea
Donât tier with a ratio of 12:1 without any logic and meritocracy.
Please if itâs possible can someone post the link to the vote for implementing dappstaking v3? we would like to see the voting numbers in this regard from the proposal to activation, we canât find the post in the forumâŚ
Thank you
From my side, I vote against the delisting for the following reasons:
The period 2 and the next voting sub-period in dAppStaking is coming. From my point of view, itâs better to let ASTR holders decide which project they want to support. Is it not the dAppStaking V3 purpose?
Even if I donât always agree with their communication, the team was always transparent and SFY Labs is a true builders team. Who knows? maybe itâs just a simple goodbye and weâll have the pleasure of seeing the SFY Labs team builds again on Astar or become a cross-chain dApp.
Honestly, if I was on their situation, I donât know how I would have reacted. Reach 15M ASTR without any help is not so easy! Building and managing the communication for a small team is time consuming! So when you see your income decreases, I can understand the disappointment.
We agree with you on everything, even the communication error perhaps. And we are sure that our situation will help Astar to grow. Nobody wishes harm to SFY Labs. we were just a little disappointed by the behavior of the core team after years of collaboration and by some Ambassadors who defended a system more than Astar itself. we will not hold a grudge for this, but we will experience it for the future.
I like the idea from @GuiGou , why not let the community vote in the next voting period, it would be good to have the ASTR holders decide. I also like the SFY transparency and keep building on Astar for a long time, I definitely want active team to stay in Astar eco
Well, my advice is keep developing, you have a lot of potential, but you just canât leave Astar and stay in the program, itâs the only detail that doesnât fit, every team has its problems and challenges.
I am sure they will come back to Astar stronger, with that development they can compete with anyone, I have seen worse developments succeed in web3, come on! You are on time.
We donât have time, the work must be paid.
Astar and its community have made a certain promise to us as we have made it as developers. Those who disregarded this promise through a U-turn are certainly not us.
We will see in the future, but in the future we will certainly not be satisfied with dappstaking support if the project is followed up. The people and teams who believed in us will be rewarded first, while financial agreements can be made with all the others. We like your optimism and genuineness, thanks in any case.
SFY have worked hard to build a project and a community on Astar under the premise of v2. However, a badly designed update, which has not been voted by the community and has not even been tested properly on Shiden, destroyed part of their effort, and probably those of other projects too, and especially cut the support that THEIR COMMUNITY was trying to give them. IMO this is a HUGE problem created by the V3 and maintaining their dApp for at least another period would be a way for Astar eco to apologize for the inconvenience and the false hope by providing financial support (even if itâs far from compensating adequately for the prejudice). Anyway, even if SFY reach Tier 3 itâs just pocket change for Astar dapp staking system.
Even if they decided to switch on MB, if their Astar community continue to support them they have the right to stay IMO. As you all said, it is the community who should decide I.E. the dApp Staker and not just a few people on a forum on which interactions are restricted to users with a certain lvl of past activity
This situation is a clear example of the bad consequences and design philosophy dApp V3 carries with it. It creates an ultra-competitive environment favoring already well-developed and established projects and communities instead of promoting the development of unpolished gems. Wasnât the whole purpose of the dApp staking to give time to projects to develop by providing them with basic financial support if supported by stakers? (And by basic, we do not talk about money for coffee here.) Honestly, Iâm afraid that other great projects will leave the ecosystem, attracted by simpler and more secure ways to support their projects.
Iâm also very disappointed to see that instead of trying to find solutions to help them or make them change their mind, people here seems to be only focus on kicking a good project out of the eco while Astar trully need this kind of projects to bring usersâŚ
Itâs nice to see another person who can critically think leave a comment, seems to be a rarity here as these points have not been addressed by anyone.
The silence is deafening from ambassadors and admins, etc
PERFECT. As suggested by us, the ambassadors should carry out a monitoring activity on the projects, not be the only ones to vote. Because this actually happens. And when you clash with ambassadors who, instead of dialogue, seek confrontation by putting everything you write in a bad light (perhaps after months of your team suffering enormous financial losses, while they are comfortable sitting in their chairs) in a senseless, senseless attempt to protect a incorrect system, you understand how all this is wrong.
The absurd thing is this:
Dappstaking as it was intended was one of astarâs best ideas. With Moonbeam will have the CERTAINTY OF SUPPORT, but all this with very tight constraints, we have signed a LEGAL contract, if our team does not develop within certain deadlines, we are forced to refund. The grant is stipulated in a âstandardâ manner, whereas dapp staking was designed precisely to make the times more flexible and make life easier for developers. Today we are witnessing a flexibility that has paradoxically remained, even if control is practically equal to 0 in some cases, and a lack of economic support for many teams which will lead them to reconsider their interests in developing on astar.
Moving development to Moonbeam does not necessarily mean that we will no longer contribute to Astar, unless our contract with Monnbeam means that we will no longer contribute to Astar, and I thought that the community should make a dApp Staking decision regarding that contribution.
They have maintained a large staking even after the announcement of the transition. That alone might be considered a contribution.
Above all, as mentioned in the Governance thread, it is not clear whether a project qualifies for dApp Staking (as opposed to the criteria). Currently, it seems to me that dApp Staking itself should be used (unless the project has committed fraud or is not running at all).
My thought is that it would be better to have a process where the listings are basically permissionless to begin with, and then delisted and blacklisted by meeting the criteria.
Even if they are delisted this time, if you are able to reiterate your contribution to Astar, you should have no problem being re-listed.
Thank you, so much appreciated! As you know we never stop building!
Currently the only truly innovative standard for the use of nfts is that of RMRK. Currently the only project really involved in using this is EVERLOOT which is on Moonbeam and which is a project that is recognized in the gaming sector because they are serious. We wanted to bring this type of innovation with a project built on Astar. It wasnât possible,we hope that others can meet your needs, in our experience this is not within everyoneâs reach. âŚ
we will do it in the future maybe who knowsâŚ
For now we will continue on our way.
perfect, the community of 23 people have spoken. We will Inform our 206 stalkers to
in official communications we will respond by posting what has been said in recent days⌠not only by SFY. Bye
