@Beck @rezen
Thank you for bravely commenting as a member of the Starlay community. I also oppose the delisting.
I agree that there have been many negative aspects in the past. However, it’s pointless to keep dwelling on the past. We should look at the current situation. In that regard, I think they have been gradually increasing their activities recently and have been issuing reports. They seem to be changing quite a bit. The past issues may slightly slow down the community’s enthusiasm, but that’s unavoidable. Reevaluation takes time.
Also, there are several posts mentioning “performance,” but discussing this without clear criteria doesn’t make much sense. Even if we were to compare, directly comparing with other chains’ dApps would be inappropriate. We need to consider it in conjunction with the transition of Astar’s total TVL (Total Value Locked). Moreover, many items in dApp Staking cannot be simply measured in terms of “performance.” If we are to talk about “performance,” we need to set evaluation criteria for all genres’ “performance,” which is difficult.
However, I do think there were some issues with the exchanges on the Forum this time. I feel that what @GuiGou said is correct. It’s unfortunate, as it significantly changes the impression.
I prioritize the current situation over the past and emotions. Honestly, if Starlay is considered inadequate now, I believe there are several projects listed in dApp Staking that are worse than Starlay. In that case, it would be better to reset all dApp Staking. However, that’s not realistic. I apologize to ArthSwap, which initiated the reset earlier, and I admire their courage, but I think it’s appropriate to wait for the dApp Staking v3 update.
dApp Staking v3 is expected to include features to address the challenges of v2. Probably, it includes things that haven’t been announced yet. I’m looking forward to this.