what would be the negative thing? and so sensational? the management of dapp staking and the money that the protocol gives out is scandalous! and you think about my account created a week ago? for me this one must be delisted, the main promoter has disappeared leaving the members to face non-trivial difficulties. now the team wants to carry on the work for me it is to be understood as a new proposal. For 2 years people here have been fossilizing on bullshit and not doing their duty, my account may have been created a week ago, but your actions speak much more. If my voice is annoying there must be a reason.
2 Likes
Your passionate stance is noted, but it’s hard to take seriously someone hiding behind a newly created account while attacking the efforts of long-standing community members who are actively working to preserve and transition the project for the benefit of the community. Instead of focusing on baseless accusations and personal attacks, let’s address the facts:
1 Initially, I was also skeptical about the dApp and even suggested its removal in my first comment on this thread. However, seeing the community rally together with genuine support and a clear plan to save and transition the project made me reevaluate. This unity and commitment convinced me to stand behind the effort.
2 The dApp is being preserved through a structured transition to ensure the community’s efforts aren’t wasted. Delisting it now would destroy progress and harm the very members you claim to care about.
3 If you believe there are genuine issues, voice them constructively under a real, credible account. Transparency builds trust. Your anonymity and timing suggest ulterior motives rather than community-driven concern.
Real accountability comes from standing behind your words with your true identity. Until then, your arguments are undermined by the shadows you choose to operate in.
2 Likes
still talking about my account? even if it was created two minutes ago you shouldn’t care as long as I express clear concepts and respect the rules. Put an end to these claims, you have nothing to expect. The dapp in question has been without updates and developments for weeks. former members had to report bad news here before regaining possession of the project. Admitting the good conduct of the same, the project is no longer the same in the way in which it was presented and does not deserve to have all the millions of astars in staking that there are now. The members do not deserve to earn the same revenue as months ago simply because there was a very serious problem bordering on scam and assuming their good faith (their reports are appreciable) the dapp should be delisted and re-proposed in a new light. This is my point of view. now talk about my account again please, so you can get more likes from the usual suspects. People without dignity and respect.
Oh wow, getting emotional, are we? Let me grab you a tissue. We all know the dApp had issues, thanks for stating the obvious.
While the community’s working to rebuild, you’re here yelling ‘delist!’ like it’s some genius fix when it only destroys progress. Drama over solutions, classic move.
2 Likes
There is no argument that progress and reconstruction are wonderful goals.
However, I don’t think there is any justification for turning a blind eye to past injustices by using them as a cover.
In so-called “Web3”, such methods have been allowed to go unchallenged due to anonymity and decentralization, but this is precisely the source of the negative public image of “blockchains being a hotbed of fraud and injustice”.
However, I am confident that we are a group that seeks to establish a safe and secure area of blockchain by gathering under the “power” of the Astar Foundation and community, which demands a certain level of ethics and discipline.
First of all, we should properly confirm the facts regarding the past misconduct and discuss the penalties for it. We must complete the settlement before we can move the project forward to the next step. We must never cover up the misconduct that occurred in order to move forward to the next step.
1 Like
look, I personally think that if VLS has a strategy to move forward, it’s welcome.
But as a rule that applies to everyone, after a period of 2 weeks in which scams were openly discussed even by those who want to carry on the project today,
@WakeUp open your ear… I not propose the delisting only, but also a new proposal, and this is why:
- lose the astars currently in staking, they are not deserved and are part of the collection of a person who left without justification. So they are a boost of 30 million compared to other undeserved dapps.
- resubmit the proposal, detailed and explaining what they intend to do to avoid making the same mistakes.
I’m giving the benefit of the doubt, I want to be positive about the correct growth of the project, but technically the members could be incompetent people(It is clear that the main figure was the founder, and we do not know what skills are needed to carry out the project.), people who simply have access to social media and little else. This must be taken into consideration. For this reason, a new proposal is needed.
It is correct and ethical, and those who talk about something else to divert the discussion should hide for the shame of having to deal with important issues without taking care of the entire community.
PS @VasaKing DO BETTER YOUR JOB LIKE AMBASSADOR INSTEAD OF LIKE ALL THE OFFENSES I RECEIVE, PROBABLY IF PEOPLE LIKE YOU HAD DONE THEIR WORK OF CONTROLLING, TODAY WE WOULD NOT WITNESS SO MANY SCAMS.
1 Like
Oh cool , looks like this is a personal offence to You. Apparently sharing your point of view is prohibited by an account created two weeks ago (although I think I have an idea of who it is) Don’t worry, I won’t respond to these provocations.
I would like to point out that the ambassador system is always open and if you believe that the work is done badly and you can do much better I invite you to apply and participate.
Buona giornata 
1 Like
Do your job as an ambassador, there is an endless list of dapps that steal money from the protocol. Stop being offended, just do your job, you and many others who have slept in the last 12 months allowing many dapps to bypass the rules. You should protect the protocol, instead you act like a child. shame on you
2 Likes
@Zorounashi If you want to start delisting apps that steal money, we should start with NeuroLaunch. It’s all hype and no substance many other projects have achieved more in three months than NeuroLaunch since they joined the dapp staking. They are building things that provide no real benefit, like their mobile game ZKStrike. I challenge you to name one thing they’ve done that has genuinely benefited the Astar Network, apart from creating hype. Even their AI efforts are a joke, as they think they can compete with companies like ChatGPT and other billion-dollar firms investing heavily in AI. Their AI adds no value to Astar. What Astar truly needs are builders who create dApps and bring real utility to the token.
Hey @Maarten, and the rest of the team! Let’s revamp the entire dApp staking system. Instead of listing projects that just farm $ASTR, let’s focus on projects that build dApps and add real value to the network. What do you think?
That’s the mission we have setup with the upcoming ‘Community Council’.
Learn more about this during our AMA tomorrow 
Also I have seen great response to initiatives organized by @AstarHood
3 Likes
Thank you, It’s about time you guys woke up and realized that people are farming $ASTR instead of actually building. A project should be required to deliver dApps, generate a certain amount of transactions (e.g 1M), and show genuine community growth and engagement before being listed. A three-month trial period could work, with or without UGC, to evaluate whether they are real builders or just farmers.
The fact that you turned dApp staking into a seasonal system isn’t working. I personally preferred the old system, but with stricter rules—if a project isn’t delivering, it should be pulled out easily. This would ensure that only serious contributors remain and the network benefits as a whole.
Ok, but VLS for me need to be delisted. Then you can suggest to talk about every dapp you want, I’m here, no problem in this. But not change the focus.
No, we are discussing everything, and I’m against delisting VLS as there’s a solution in the works. You should respect other people’s points of view—you’re not the only one here. You’ve made your point, and we understand, but this decision isn’t up to you alone.
when I not respect your idea? sorry but you are only complaining too much… I have write all the point for my decision here:
No hate vs this project, only share my opinion, and the correct interpetration of rules. After this the community will decide, but my opinion have it has the same weight as yours, and it’s right that people will read it. Then the others will make up their own minds.
1 Like
@Satoshi is there any updates on the takeover of NEET of VLS? I do feel that it would be difficult to switch the current sentiment around VLS. Do you have a plan how you would be able to resolve this?
Would love to learn more.
1 Like
I agree with AstarHood.
Without knowing how to proceed, we cannot discuss whether or not the listing can continue. In the current state of affairs, I think we need to make the decision to delist once.
Agreed with ya. Without a clear way forward, it’s difficult to determine whether the listing can continue. Given the current circumstances, I believe we need to make the decision to delist at this point.
Difficult to take good decisions without the right information indeed.
I also agree with the direction of delisting. We cannot maintain the listing while the project’s status remains unclear. Once the situation has stabilized, the project should decide whether to reapply for dApp Staking.
Suppose that the VLS is delisted and some other project takes over the VLS.
In that case, if the project to be taken over is an existing project, would it be necessary to delist the project and apply again for dApp Staking?