As for now, I’m not supporting this proposal to delist Starlay from dApp Staking, I want to see how dApp Staking v3 first, it is far more easier with the voting mechanism.
But to be honest, as I psychologically got insulted back then by local Astar community members ( see Indonesian channel on Astar Discord or Astar Indonesian telegram back in Q2 2022) as many of them pointing fingers at me because I was saying to put their fund on ur dApp and I did this just to support your dApp and I say this without expecting anything in return it’s just for the sake of Astar growth. And looking at your listing, it was very dissappointing, feels like the team scamming us.
Just because I said NO to this proposal but from my perspective and Indonesian Astar community, It’s zero trust for Starlay. I only respect the Astar team that they spending more than half a year to build dApp Staking v3.
Let me ask all of you Astor ambassadors. Is it your intention to hold each other back, rather than work together to move the community forward? I believe not. No matter what we have achieved in the past, you seem to be making assumptions based on past negative impressions without thoroughly examining the facts. Not all of you, of course. In fact, no one we interact with directly has complained here.
Please don’t try to find reasons to exclude Starlay just because you subjectively dislike us. If the argument is that you want more transparency objectively, we have already disclosed everything. We’ll insist that as many times as we can here. However, I would like to clarify a few points once again.
As for the Lending thing, see the logs. The discussion diverged, but eventually, the LAY was lent to Astar indefinitely.
Seiya regularly shares a roadmap during community calls, and all actions and funds are made transparent through the Forum. If there is a DeFi team in Astar that is more transparent than we are, please let me know. I would like to refer to them.
Please don’t say “nothing is being done” because that is really disrespectful to Seiya and David. I see them developing every day and new ideas are discussed with various teams on Telegram.
When the uproar broke out a year and a half ago, I reflected on the way things were decided. I thought I should have had more disclosure and made decisions with the community. Now, I can confidently say that we are developing with the community: the forum, treasury management, our salary, and the next implementation are all decided by the community.
If you have any reasonable requests, let us know. We will consider incorporating them if they are better than the current way, just as we’ve done in the past. I think this is why we have the Forum and Ambassadors.
A liquidity protocol that does not know that liquidity is important to sustain a project like this in the long term, “Liquidity is DeFi’s lifeblood”, not understanding this, presumes other intentions.
In conclusion, if they stay they will be destined to drain more funds or use them in the wrong way, as they have implicitly stated that they do not have professional market makers for market management.
When the bull market is looming is when they want to retake the project, it is very common in this type of projects, I think a meme token with the name LAY would give more results to the Astar ecosystem.
Guys sorry but you have earned this post yourselves @moonme just said what everyone has seen.
If Starlay is a scam, Astar is also scam( sometimes I see and hear from other peoples ).
I belong to small developer community in Japan, few month ago, we invited one of Astar co-funder to talk about Web3 as guest speaker.
His opinion is simple, “Web3 is only good for collecting Money.”
We were very surprised except me, I know him, so it’s his true feeling about Web3. Web3 is NOT Utopia.
( We can see his nickname in github as early contributor. )
I also feel sad & bad about canary network’s name. It’s well known WWII Japanese Air Force Figter’s name in Japan like Zero-Figter( Kamikaze ). Foreigner or young people may not know well.
I apologized it to the participants in ShidenDAO, especially CTO who is Korean( Of course he knew that fact and felt sad ).
I beg people, “Never call someone’s project as a SCAM” without proper evidence.
( We already fully discussed and implemented before, about Starlay case. )
Hi. I am a community member of Starlay.
I participated in Starlay’s ICO and have been observing their activities ever since.
In my opinion, especially recently, Starlay’s activities have become more active.
Particularly since the SCI (Starlay-Chan Initiative) joined as a service provider, there has been more proactive engagement with the community.
While the number of community members may be small, the operators are making an effort to gather community feedback through forums and snapshots.
I believe this is a result of learning from Starlay’s past failures.
They are making efforts to improve in their own way, and I think the delisting from dapp staking is an unfair treatment.
This is my first post on Forum.
Sorry for my poor English as I am translating.
I had a bad image of Starlay since I participated in the Starlay IDO at that time.
But after that, my impression changed a lot when I learned that they have reflected on their mistakes and made a lot of improvements.
Now I want to support Starlay.
Starlay has been adopted by the Astar Incuvation Program, and if Starlay is a scam, then Astar CoreTeam and Ambassador are also scams.
But I know that neither of them are scams.
I hope you all appreciate not only their past failures, but also how they have improved from them.
@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.
@GuiGou
I’m sorry, but I’m not quite clear on what you are asking for. As I have mentioned repeatedly before, the mistakes have been recognized, and as already written numerous times in this thread, transparency reports have been submitted for quite some time now. We also explain these in our monthly community calls.
Regarding your question about what has been developed since our listing on dAppStaking, including any encountered difficulties, and our current and future developments, we have already addressed this as well in our monthly call and twitter, discord, medium and forum.
Furthermore, we have been announcing our participation in the ink!ubator program on Twitter and Discord. The milestone 2 delivery of this program has also been communicated in our monthly community calls and our twitter. Please take a moment to read through the posts by myself and @neo.
Additionally, as already mentioned, we proposed to the Astar community to submit monthly progress reports for not this kind of misunderstanding happing. You can find more details about this proposal here: dApp staking programs should be transparent - #24 by SeiyaChida
Thank you for your comment. I find your opinion to be very insightful and have no objections to it.
The only part I’m curious about is the following sentence, which I’m having trouble understanding. Could you please explain what was wrong with us when you are available.
“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.”
Hi @neo_defi@SeiyaChida
What made people to hate Starlay is the loss of their money by poor IDO made by starlay.
And what they hate to see is that starlay is acting as nothing happened and keep getting money from dappstaking.
This is my understanding of what people who had participated in IDO think.
And even though Starlay get delisted by dappstaking it does not make people to forgive Starlay.
I have a suggestion to make people forgive Starlay
-BUY BACK LAY with price of IDO from who particated on IDO
By doing buy back everyone would be happy as the price of LAY will grow by buy back by people who participated, People who participated on IDO have their money back(If they have already sold LAY with cheap price they may have lost but better than nothing).
For money to buy back Starlay can use the astar earned from dappstaking.
Sounds good for me and I want to know how you feel.
I am not directly a Starlay investor but I had used the protocol some time ago.
I don’t think delisting can solve the problem and frankly I would prefer to test the dApp staking model for precisely these situations.
Nonetheless, based on my experience and the lack of presence during the bear phase (which in my opinion shows who is left to build or not) my vote is inclined towards delist/re applying, if anything we will get to the choice of vote.
I hope that a detailed roadmap and more active and positive participation on the forum can change my opinion
Unfortunately, we tried to make money through investment and failed. That’s all there is to it. It’s wrong to ask for a buyback just because we lost money on the investment. Instead, I would like the money to be used for the future development of Starlay.
Also, proposals and discussions about buybacks should be conducted on the Starlay Forum, not the Astar Forum.
Hi rezen
Thank you for your comment.
I suggested about buyback because it was not normal IDO what everyone thought.
Starlay did not follow the rule they made for IDO.
If the rule is changed why not ask for buyback as we are not playing the same game.
I am sorry that it was not appropriate to write comment about in here.
And @SeiyaChida would you comment back on me before make like on what rezen comment on me.
Thank you
The discussion regarding the compensation proposal concluded a year and a half ago on the Astar forum. My understanding is that it was agreed by the community to move forward.
The issue at hand is different. I would appreciate if we could focus on discussing whether the recent performance of Starlay, compared to other dApps receiving dapp staking, justifies delisting. That’s the current point of debate.
Thank you for your comment.
I didn’t know we had discussion about compensation a year and half ago and it ended with move forward.
Sorry about talking about another topics, it was not appropriate.
My opinion is to delist not only Starlay but all PJ at once with no exception and dappstaking should not work again.
Could you justify why if Starlay is scam, Astar is scam too? It is very easy to shoot if you try!
There are thousands of projects that incubate other projects, and some of these projects lose direction, that does not mean that the incubator is a scammer!
Every time I read comments on Starlay I reaffirm more on the previous comment.
I came here to be balanced, but I got comments, which lack humility from the team.
It is very easy to point out the mistakes of others, and difficult but noble to accept one’s own mistakes.
I would like to see a different attitude from the team from now on, and reach a middle ground in the discussion, so that Starlay can continue in dApp Staking, but I think that the majority will vote Yes to the delist.
On the other hand, dApp Staking V3, will get rid of projects that do not meet its objectives and that is a relief for the near future, there will be no opinions, only facts.
If a “No” vote is cast, either the Starlay team is destined to continue working or dApp Staking V3 will take care of putting things in place and that is a relief.
Could you justify why if Starlay is scam, Astar is scam too? It is very easy to shoot if you try!
There are thousands of projects that incubate other projects, and some of these projects lose direction, that does not mean that the incubator is a scammer!
Regarding your question about justifying the claim that if Starlay is a scam, then Astar must be too, it seems to be a statement taken out of the broader context. This topic doesn’t directly relate to the issue at hand. There are assertions labeling Starlay as a scam, but it’s unclear what specific aspects are being referred to as scam-like, especially when compared to other projects receiving dApp staking rewards. The main focus of this discussion should be on whether Starlay’s recent performance, in comparison to other dApps in dApp staking, justifies its delisting. This is the point we should be debating.
Every time I read comments on Starlay I reaffirm more on the previous comment.
I came here to be balanced, but I got comments, which lack humility from the team.
It is very easy to point out the mistakes of others, and difficult but noble to accept one’s own mistakes.
You’re correct that it’s extremely easy to perpetually point out past mistakes. However, this platform should be used for constructive discussions on acknowledging these mistakes and deliberating on what actions should be taken moving forward.
I would like to see a different attitude from the team from now on, and reach a middle ground in the discussion, so that Starlay can continue in dApp Staking, but I think that the majority will vote Yes to the delist.
Regarding your desire for a change in attitude from the team and finding a middle ground, could you please specify what aspects of our attitude you’re referring to? As I’ve explained numerous times, we are reflecting on our past and preparing for the future. I’ve written about this repeatedly, but have you had a chance to read my posts?
We are open to constructive feedback, not just rehashing the past and are committed to making necessary adjustments to ensure the success and integrity of Starlay within the Astar ecosystem. We value this discussion and hope it leads to a positive outcome for all involved.
I believe that now we can debate in a more appropriate way.
I am waiting for more updates from the team, I have been able to confirm that they are working but I would like them to have more presence in the ecosystem in order to generate more confidence, both for the ambassadors and the community.
