❇️ UCG: SkyLabs - Next Steps

Thank you, @AstarHood, for this helpful summary. It’s valuable for everyone to have a clear overview of the current situation.

SkyLabs has demonstrated good intentions and maintained transparency but has faced challenges in the development of their smart contracts. From what I understand, they have not abandoned the project and are continuing development with a new developer.

That said, given the current lack of on-chain activity, it’s better to delist the project for the time being. I would fully support relisting it in the future once there is tangible on-chain progress.

2 Likes

I’m torn on this vote to be honest.

So if Skylabs are being delisted because of the lack of on chain transactions piece - Neurolanche should be also be delisted, yes?

If not, why? I just want to understand.

All i’ve ever wanted from the start is that all dApps are being treated equally

1 Like

To be completely honest, I 100% agree.
I don’t see Skylabs should be used as setting an example when Community Council is still working on the guidelines to actively change things on dApp Staking. This vote has been mainly pushed by what AstarHood pointed out, a target by a team that has been very active and created a lot of noise around them because of some underlying vendetta towards them.

I’m against their delisting because we are not setting any standard because of this vendetta. First we come up with a clear guideline that has been discussed in other thread and act on it.

Because of this game, I voted ‘Nay’

2 Likes

Most likely Neurolanche will be the next to be analyzed to understand if they can still be part of dApp staking or not. Speaking of SFYLabs I think the critical points are the lack of communication and the delay of the roadmap milestones. On the other hand, as I commented on Subsquare I think the team has reacted and responded well to the community’s questions and I think they deserve to stay.
Obviously I could be wrong but for this I am very confident in the Council and in the management of the community, if this behavior were to recur obviously we will move to delisting.

I would like to formally report @WakeUp for continually breaking the new forum guidelines.

This phrasing presumes that the topic or statement being addressed is inherently invalid or unworthy, signaling a lack of openness to dialogue. Additionally, it subtly implies judgment

The statement “You’re calling yourself a 3D Artist, but you keep parading assets as your own that clearly aren’t yours. Let’s cut the act” is toxic because it’s accusatory, dismissive, and confrontational. It assumes wrongdoing without room for clarification, undermines the person’s credibility, and uses inflammatory language like “cut the act,” which escalates tension rather than encouraging resolution or understanding.

This phrase dismisses the topic outright, framing it as unworthy of discussion and shutting down meaningful dialogue. Toxic because it sets a hostile tone from the outset.

Again a claim which is not true.

This phrase dismisses any explanation as invalid or insincere, shutting down constructive dialogue and fostering defensiveness.

This statement is condescending and accusatory, implying laziness or incompetence, which discourages respectful engagement.

This statement is accusatory and sarcastic, framing the issue in a way that ridicules and undermines trust rather than seeking clarification or fostering constructive accountability.

This statement is accusatory and loaded with judgment, attacking motives and integrity without inviting clarification or offering constructive solutions.

The majority of the points raised here have already been discussed earlier, yet they are repeated in a condescending manner, implying things without offering constructive engagement. This type of communication only fuels negativity and confusion, much like the behavior exhibited by Sfylabs and their members, who were known for harassing and undermining others. Such behavior harms the community and should be addressed appropriately.

This is not an unreasonable amount if you take into account the workload involved in the development of the project.

My position on this proposal is always to look after Astar’s interests and the growth of our community, but as a blockchain developer, I understand the technical difficulties faced by the teams when it comes to project maintenance.

Also, it is important to take into account that the hiring of two external devs is contemplated, this increases costs, no one should give away their work, I agree with that.

@knacker65 @AkinSkylab
However, I would like more concrete data, for example:

Each the designer, the blockchain dev and the product manager will charge 35 USD/hr and per month would be 750 USD for example, with that data we could better understand the economic situation. But I repeat, this is not a problem considering the project itself.

Thank you for your input @Juminstock !

We typically pay on a per-project basis, and there is often quite a bit of negotiation regarding pricing. We prefer not to work with new contractors on an hourly rate unless we’ve worked with them before, or we set a defined scope of work to avoid unexpected costs.

For example, with our first contractor, we agreed on a full migration for a flat fee of around $1,500, plus a set amount of additional fees, which would arise. Later, we adjusted this to a base amount of $2,500 plus support, with no additional fees. Unfortunately, this contractor dissolved their company unexpectedly, and we received a refund of about $300, but were left with a tool that essentially became unusable.

Next, we worked with a developer for the remainder of the migration, agreeing to a $1,500 fee with $500 upfront. While the developer made the migration tool functional again, he lacked expertise in KSM Polkadot migration and had little knowledge of smart contracts and EVM. When we asked him to build and prepare smart contracts for nested NFTs, he ghosted us.

The third instance involved a team from Canada who charged $5,000. After finalizing the deal, our blockchain operations have run smoothly ever since. All assets were migrated successfully and the RMRKR functionality was implemented within the agreed timeline, despite some claims to the contrary. All of this happened in a 6-9 month time frame.

As for artists, we usually pay them on a day-rate basis, which depends on their skill and the specific task at hand. They charge a fixed price, and we work with set conditions. This area is largely managed by Akin, and the artists we work with are either highly skilled or senior-level professionals, each with different rates. For example, a monster creator might charge a $200/day rate, potentially totaling $6,000 for just one monster. However, we had special arrangements with the artists, so we paid less and kept everything within our budget.

Overall, we’ve made the best of our available budget, and while the blockchain part was a stroke of bad luck, I want to emphasize that the results of our artwork speak for themselves. Despite some claims of “nothing original,” our work is truly on a Professional level and industry standard, and I’d like to make sure this doesn’t get lost in the conversation. The things we’ve built so far would cost any other team potentially 3-5 times the amount of our budget, not factoring in the taxes we had to pay.

We’re fortunate to have worked with some of the best people in their fields, and most of them joined us because they believed in our project, not for financial gain. That’s why they were willing to lower their costs to help us succeed.

Hope that helps as an answer.

1 Like

What is the company’s VAT number, where is the company located, and I am still waiting for the source control invitation. stop ignoring me.

For me, your answer is extremely accurate.

Quality software developer is a task that not only involves “knowing how to program” but combines areas such as creativity, dexterity, efficient equipment management and more, plus it is not cheap at all.

That is why from my side, I understand your situation and you have my support.

In terms of results, when will we be able to see more progress from your work?

Regarding this, @knacker65, can we give an answer?

No we will not, as one of our artists was doxxed in the last post, we will not give out any more personal information or any information that could lead to personal information.

1 Like

@WakeUp
Any legit business needs to be registered and pay taxes on any income it earns, whether that’s from crypto tokens like those from the Community Treasury or other sources. @knacker65 already explained this clearly—they have to pay taxes in Germany. That’s just how it works for any business, whether the income is in crypto or not.

Skylabs are not going to share extra details about their company because that falls under doxxing, and it’s against the forum guidelines. Let’s stick to the main point here, which is discussing Skylabs’ project in Astar’s dApp Staking. The focus should be on evaluating their contributions and legitimacy for dApp Staking and their contribution to the Astar Ecosystem, not auditing or digging into their business structure.

Also, a quick reminder to keep things respectful and follow the Rules of Engagement. Some of your posts have been aggressive and even mocking, like using clown emojis, and that goes against the forum’s rules. We’re all about fostering a positive and constructive vibe here, not toxic or hostile behavior. If this continues, we’ll have to moderate more.

Let’s get back on track and keep the conversation productive. Thanks!

6 Likes

Thanks a lot!
It would be great if everyone should now just vote on the proposal and let your voice speak in the Governance that Astar has been built. Let your ASTR speak!

Everything is already shared in this thread for people to read, no need to add more of the same questions or to bump up the thread (doing the same now :thinking:, sorry).

Looking forward to the outcome of the vote.
AstarHood is here to be your guardian but step by step as individual contributor and being part of the community council.

5 Likes

I believe there hasn’t been a clear set of rules regarding on-chain activity. While it would be great to see more transparency, on-chain activity is an issue many other popular projects face as well. Considering the complexities of technology, gaming, and web3, delays are often inevitable.

The worst time to withdraw funds is during a bull market, as that’s when teams can capitalize on the positive bull run momentum in the crypto space. Unless there is evidence of clear misuse or abuse of funds, I find it difficult to support delisting. From what I’ve seen, there are many positive remarks, and most concerns seem to revolve around the on-chain activity. It also appears they’ve made efforts to maintain transparency.

We at Skylab would like to begin by expressing our heartfelt thanks to everyone who supported constructive dialogue and allowed us the chance to defend ourselves. Your respect and acknowledgment of us as a community member within Astar has meant a great deal, and we are grateful for the support we’ve received so far.

Regarding the recent referendum to delist Skylab, while the outcome was a failure to pass, we cannot overlook the fact that over 86% voted in favor of delisting. This strong majority sentiment cannot be ignored. Even though the referendum’s result allows us to continue, we believe it would be undemocratic and contrary to the intent of the process to move forward without addressing this majority view.

In respect of the community’s voice, we will propose a delisting through the council to ensure fairness and uphold the principles of transparency.

At this point, we also wish to announce a brief hiatus. During this period, we will:

  1. Finalize the preparation and shipment of the first staking rewards.
  2. Reflect on our journey, assess the challenges and mistakes, and evaluate the feasibility of moving forward.
  3. Take the time needed to consider all options carefully before making any definitive decisions about Skylab’s future.

This is not an easy time for us, and we want to manage expectations responsibly. We will provide a further update in approximately two weeks, once we’ve had time to conclude our evaluations and decide on the next steps.

We deeply appreciate the community’s patience and understanding as we navigate this challenging situation.

1 Like

To understand more about why the voting didnt passed, you can learn more about it here: Governance V1 · Polkadot Wiki

We are still in the process of bootstrapping our onchain governance and the turnout rate is too low to pass the majority vote. I do respect Skylabs direction and would like to propose Community Council to initiate the call:

@Gaius_sama @jay @tksarah @pitcoin777 @AstarHood @Mouthmouth68

2 Likes

Thanks for sharing the next direction of Skylabs.
Even though the voting has been fair based on the turnout, as part of the community council I do respect your choose and will initiate the call.

Posted: Delisting SkyLabs Project from dApp Staking

@Gaius_sama @pitcoin777 @tksarah @Mouthmouth68 @jay please vote on the council vote.

1 Like

I am very glad that everything has been conducted in a healthy debate until the end, and that is what governance is for, and all projects are always welcome.

1 Like

On request of SkyLabs team, the delisting proposal has been executed by the Community Council.

2 Likes