who is this guy man? your fan for sure
soNow you’re trying to pass us off as the ones out of context? We wrote the context here: Unstoppable Grants Proposal: Skylab Corp - #232 by SFY_Labs
can you answer about it if you want.
For us you are out of any dappstaking rules. that’s all. and from 2023. Follow the rules and I don’t think anyone can tell you anything.
I, for one, will no longer engage in this discussion until proper moderation is implemented.
I will monitor the replies moving forward.
Only relevant posts that are related to this topic will be allowed.
@knacker65 it might also be good to talk with @0xRamz if we should keep this thread open or move to a new one.
Thank you @Maarten i will be talking to Ramz and see next steps.
Ok so what is written by several people here is irrelevant? Some pretty serious accusations have been made about the work of SKYLAB. Can you please go into the merits of this?
-They have never worked with the astar blockchain as proposed in the proposal and as established by the regulation
-They have always said that their work was difficult because it took time to create everything. In fact today it is discovered thanks to research by others that they are all assets bought on third-party markets
-In an attempt to divert the discussion they invented a fake migration of a few days (According to them that should be the blockchain product), it’s quite funny.
-The only support is Ramz who is also the one who probably subsidizes them with millions of astar in staking (there would be nothing wrong if all the rules were respected)
-They sold nfts in the yoki ports for more than 30k in rewards without specifying anything about their use (always because they did not produce blockchain)
And now they have blown the discussion and you propose to decide with Ramz what to do with this discussion that has become quite pungent?
So they can start over for another 12 months of making fun of people while trying to call themselves developers.
Incredible.
How can you allow a dapp that breaks the rules since its inception? Wouldn’t you have done better to finance it yourself? It was a cleaner solution.
There is no vote that can confirm their listing in dappstaking, if the rules are not respected, what should we vote for, if the rules are fair?
Are the rules not rules? We thought we understood this when you excluded us for lack of funds, or lack of astars in staking on tier (exactly 100.000 )
from an ambassador with no interest, magically Ramz’s response changed everything, why? Did this ambassador make a mistake or report incorrect things?
Wait also for your answer @knacker65
@you425 Please start delisting vote
I’m talking about the sudden discussion between MonkeyDRuffy and SFY_labs.
This is not relevant to this topic. So I’ll moderate that this stays about Skylabs.
Thank you
No need to attack me, it’s mainly about the unrelated discussion as mentioned above.
As mentioned several times we are going off topic talking about SFY labs while the main topic should be the evaluation of Skylab. I would rather read more constructive comments rather than continuous insults and denigrations.
The forum remains an open platform and if you want to directly propose the delisting you can do so.
They used one of their trollers to bring the discussion comfortable on their side and you think the discussion has degenerated because of us?
we did an analysis above after being quoted. We did not even attack them personally but criticized the whole system that allowed this.
So now we want to be clear, since we had a proposal of a similar concept (COMPLETE, while theirs is still in the high seas after more than 1 year without any lack of support)
This team has benefited perhaps for hundreds of thousands of $ of rewards in 15 months and has not produced anything, they do not know how to do a fucking airdrop, they do not even know what a blockchain is and you come to talk about this bullshit after they are listed with all the rules broken from the beginning?
Since we are a graphics team we can also do research on what Wakeup said above and find out if the assets were purchased or created from 0. Given the insults we expose ourselves. If that is missing too (and that is not the purpose of subsidizing dappstaking).
Skylab asked to collaborate with us in 2022 and we still have their messages, we decided not to collaborate because they were not honest in their sale of nfts on singular (they had promised things and not kept them and were not seen well by many people we knew) and so we decided to avoid.
Today we find out that they are funded, and we had to leave not only working for free here but losing money and asking for help from one of your biggest competitors in the sector so as not to have to throw away our work.
We are so tired of being made fun of in this ecosystem and especially by the treatment reserved by the core team (thanks for the block Maarten) that as soon as we have finished our development on AgeOfChronos (mid-January) and therefore we are freer, we will make a long post where we will describe all the difficulties and incorrectness encountered here on astar. Starting from the relationship that existed between us Maarten and ending by mentioning all the dapps that unlike us have benefited from funds without deserving it. It will be a recap of 2024 and will be public for everyone.
Another one who has always trolled us just because he disagrees with us is the legendary Vasaking, who as you can see, instead of intervening on the shortcomings of the teams (his job), intervenes to say that the messages are not related.
What a shame…Why don’t you do your job as harshly as you have done towards us in the past?He has made it a principle by now, and even if the others are dead wrong he tries in every way to instigate and drag us in as the bad guys. Classic.
@you425 Has he posted what’s wrong with this dapp, has anyone else written or taken action here?
PS: We want to clarify one thing:
We are against the system, not against skylab, we have sincerely given you our research on their work done, since we were talking about nfts and rmrk and in our opinion they cannot be part of the system if the rules apply to everyone, this does not mean that things can change, the fact remains that for more than a year both they and other projects that have not brought any value have been financed.
I see that as always my messages are misunderstood, modified and used against myself. Ok.
I have already specified that when you asked for support I was the one who brought the discussion to telegram to help you reach T3 by translating articles and bringing other Italian stakers to SFY. Despite any effort made to help you (I am not a whale and I cannot help you financially) it continues with a continuous complaint and an invitation to do my job better…
I have not much left to add, good luck with your project on the other chains
in fact it is so, more people are telling you and from different research done that the team is outside the rules, and despite this both you and other Ambassadors are silent, while you attacked sfy for a “meritocratic” issue. why don’t you act and do what you are responsible for? in this case there should be no vote, are there rules, are they respected? Yes or no?
15 months of rules broken.
Hola all,
Firstly apologies for the time away in participating in discussions in general. I will be more active on this forum especially as we move to a more pragmatic, open governance model. I’ll also be more frank about my opinions, and always in a respectful matter. The following views are my own and I do not speak on behalf of any other core-team member, the network, a dapp, or ambassador/agent. As web3 allows, and can benefit from, open discussion and criticism are important. In this sense I will speak from the POV of a initial contributor of the UCG program structure. I’m open to criticism in regards to any activity and program I’ve help mold - such as UCG. As any builder can attest, its not always easy building, and even more so with commenters who aim to tear down, instead of building up. To those offering ideas and solutions, and other data that can help improve UCG, I thank you kindly. A separate thread will be created for this shortly.
Its nothing new, but it always saddens me to see the countless baseless accusations, off-topics discussions (mainly hijacking of the main thread points), assumptions of the actions of ambassadors/agents and core-team members, and other speculative (even inflammatory) comments all without merit or proof.
In my years in web3 this is nothing new, and points rather to the mud-slinging nature of certain users, and what their intentions are. You need only look at the Polkadot proposals comment section to see that users like these are a guarantee to happen - just as guaranteed as taxes are in our life. Imo I don’t think their aim is entirely to actually “clean-up” or other higher moral stance as some of they state, but rather sow discontent, stir anger, and exaggerate monetary gains/losses in a way to bring down builders, competition, or other. This approach is not inductive to real growth, only slows it down. I don’t actually know their intentions, and who am I to make unfounded accusations as well. But what Im sure about is that when we do read accusations and/or assumptions of intentions of builders, core-team members and/or Astar agents, it speaks more loudly about the poster, then the the actually substance their arguments are formed around. Anyway, just a thought.
Experience has thought me that this will continue to happen - no matter the actions, the words, the feelings shared, the proof shown or not shown. Again, this will keep on happening, but it should happen in a more productive manner. Any and all disrespectful comments and blatant accusations without proof will not be tolerated. My reminder to builders, and supporter of those builders, keep the focus on the goal, even when experiencing vitriol.
I rather move to actions, next steps. I’ll create new threads to focus on SkyLabs and UCG respectively. For the reminder of this post I’d also give some context about UCG for any new readers and further action on that front.
UCG was started as a a means to support builders at the early stages of development. It gave an allowance of rewards based on projected milestones presented by the participating teams, and for a limited time basis. As an added benefit it allowed users to also stake on those dapps at their own discretion. It also form an avenue for dapp teams to take when looking to grow their reputation, user base awareness, and involve others (user and/or builder) in their build. As I’ve seen firsthand, UCG not just help filter teams, but also showed the teams themselves the complexities of building in the web3 space. It’s educational as much as its a means of financial support. The core of UCG is, and will always be, to support builders aiming to bring value to Astar and its users.
In the start, these UCG financial gains were minimal, almost non-impactful to any semblance of runway for the builders. In the early days it didn’t even mount to 4 figures over a month. Now, even at Tier 3 support, its still hard to envision a competitive dapp and funds to support a multi-disciplinary team in web3. (Any web3 builder knows that its a costly effort and there is more working against web3 builders than for them, especially in the this fast changing space with security a constant concern.)
I’ve helped structure the UCG framework in the early phase. Promoted it in the Astar discord, publicly on X spaces and in private groups when wearing my bd hat. Was it or is it perfect? Absolutely not. Will it be better? Yes, it can be, though now there are many moving parts, ever-changing markets, and narratives that grow and disappear that can bring new builders and interest to the chain, or push them out. Making “improvements” is a added task for many, including me, since it means constant observations and analysis and even experimentation and adjustments.
The current iteration of the UCG model can be said to still be a work in progress. While it was seeded and grew from the internal teams efforts, now it should be considered a public tool. The criticism to the original creators is deserved and in this I’ll take full responsibility on not making a more extended effort to make it known as a community own program - but I state now that it is - and input is welcomed.
I’d like to also state now that it should enter a new phase, especially since Astar Governance is here. Makes sense to me. UCG can be powerful, not just as a support system for new teams, but also as a means to attract and compete for new builders. As a contributor to Astar, I’d like to help lead the next iteration along with those that look to improve it. This means we make proposals and content around it that can help educate builders so they are better informed of expectations and outcomes.
As stated I’ll make a separate thread where anyone is invited to propose changes, rules, guidance, and any other comment that helps improve the program.
For SkyLabs, my previous comments here remain true. I support this team because I know they are consistently building within a field that I personally think will be key to web3: Gaming. Not only has it been difficult for gaming teams throughout this space to hit it on the nose - and this can be attributed to many factors - but I rather grow a relationship with a team that is focused on this now and committed to a chain and community that has supported them, even if there are obstacles and hiccups. Imo a committed builder is more valuable than a chain to chain hopper or one-and-done (gives up fast if not successful at first). I have a lofty expectation that they will fill in a gaming void thats is present on Astar, and could contribute to a developing sector along side Soneium and gaming teams that join there. But their listing should not and will not be dependent on my voice alone, but rather only if theres community consensus around it.
That being said, its apparent that we need to address the impasse we are at. Skylab was voted onto UCG based on milestones and deliverables stated in the initial UCG application. SkyLabs needs to clearly respond to:
As a reminder, anyone can make a motion to delist any dapp from the portal, UCG or not. Its up to us as a community to begin taking ownership of this process. For sake of advancing this conversation, and reach an outcome, I’ll push for a sentiment vote in the new tread after 2 days with the following simple options:
My general hope is to use this as an example to improve the current UCG program by highlighting what the program is lacking. Also, I’d like to highlight users and even dapp teams who want contribute to it. My aim is not to vilify teams or discredit what they have built so far, knowing how hard it actually is from the 3 years of talking and helping some myself. To add, we must set a basis for what metrics we choose to evaluate UCG and dApp teams on, individually and/or based on the project category. This should be done alongside users. We also need to address steps being taken to ensure transparency and accountability for a teams funding and progress. Dapps, as much as our community, should both be held to this: Clear process and clear consequences if not met.
Please use the following thread where I will push SkyLabs for clarity in current efforts and next concrete steps/actions that need to be immediately taken:
For UCG, its future and some of the points mentioned above, please feel free to comment on any current issues and possible solutions. Use the following thread:
For any other topic mentioned here, perhaps relevant to specific teams, please open up a new thread and outline the specific context and discussion points that you’d like to discuss. Please tag me if you’d like to hear my opinion/feedback. My responses will first and foremost always be centered around whats best for Astar its users and builders.
Thank you for reading and being part of this effort to build up Astar into the best it can be.
SkyLabs: Next Steps