Who exactly came up with the plan to end governance? There are many issues that need to be addressed. In the spirit of decentralization and usage of the POOL token as intended, I plan to put this to vote. As someone who has been here from the beginning, the rise and fall of pool together is a story for the books.
Will anyone here PUBLICLY support forking of the treasury? I hope more people chose to share what they see in the future on the post in the Ideas and Discussion section. Meaning team and the broader community, but the lack of forum participation entirely speaks volumes to the effectiveness of the current system. So much that the leaders, spokes people, and password holders cant keep up this decentralized charade .
We know who already has plans for the treasury and who has questions about the intent or process of dissolving it. Take a breath, don’t take it personal.
If you are not comfortable sharing here, this will be put up for vote by me and the support of 2 top holders.
I hope to hear from individuals, but sadly I fear that only people who have granted themselves treasury funds in the past will respond. I still welcome all opinions, but discount them if you already have plans that are expected to happen for the community’s funds.
I understand this may go ignored or may cause people to buy and arbitrage the opportunity. These are result of the tokenomic rule set put forth and what is supposed to be what gives the token it’s value.
I open the conversation for about 2 weeks. It would be silly if no one cares enough to respond or isn’t paying attention to the opportunity to further develop the system.
This is a request for comment and parameters are open for discussion. I believe wrapping any POOL token for the new DAO would be the route to go.
Say the votes against the fork are 200k and the votes for are 100k POOL, an example of the split would be taking 33% of the treasury funds to continue the original mission that pool together started, but this time in a truly decentralized and autonomous way.
This would be simple proposals without conversation and voting on the legitimacy of them. I will share more shortly on how this autonomous system works if people show interest.
Governance is on the path towards being completely removed due to V5 of the protocol. This was decided by the developers and not the community.
I’m not entirely sure how bifurcating the treasury would be beneficial. I’d rather see the treasury going to ways to either enhance prizes or drip to depositors, things to help with the growth.
Honestly, I’d rather see the treasury at the end of 2024 as a large deposit into the protocol distributed equally across all chains the protocol is launched on with a custom hook. Should the Treasury Deposit win a prize, the hook would redistribute it to the biggest loser (the depositor with the largest deposit with the longest period without a winning, vault agnostic), using a portion of the prize to pay for gas.
You mentioned that a few times already. I’m curious, did you use other handles or accounts in the past? You made your first appearance on Discord in January this year and your account on here was created in February. I think it could help understanding your history if people knew what other names you go by (if that’s the case).
What would be your plan going forward after a fork?
Who controls the funds?
What system would governance be based on?
How would the funds be used?
Comments like this one aren’t helpful to the conversation.
However, you are complaining about a spam protection feature of the forum software. It’s based on reputation and prevents bad actors from abusing the forum to populate scams. After spending some time on the forum and engaging in a handful of conversations the forum awards you with additional permissions. It’s automated and has the same rules for everyone.
Unless I’m misunderstanding you, it doesn’t work that way. The treasury is controlled by voters. To move any assets you need a majority to vote YES (and quorum of 100k).
If there was to be a treasury split it would have to be voted in by a majority. Being that you don’t know how many votes will vote FOR you can’t propose a split based on voting results. I suppose you could do an offchain vote to see what the split is and then put that onchain.
This is an issue that needs addressed
This might be difficult without some offchain inputs. There are lots of good ways to take the treasury and create more wins though that I think are valid proposals for use of treasury funds.
thanks everyone for your response. My comments immediately after came as I regret not being more structured with this post and showing my strong passion and frustration throughout.
I feel that a few decided the path and have future plans regarding the treasury that most don’t know about. The confidence in the move to do so makes me feel like there is either a hidden agenda or "End game is an “exit move”. Other projects use endgame as a reference to a move towards domination of a market or the trade world. Here Endgame feels like a way of liquidating future protocol funding.
In my opinion, a fork or splitting of the treasury is a good thing towards decentralization and we honestly should split it into 5 ,9, or 11 separate treasuries of diverse people all working towards a common purpose of enhancing the protocol. This allows for people to align with values and causes as they wish and even chose to be part of many of them. In the current state, Pool Together is single political party governing system.
This is great and I would love to hear more conversation around this. Tell me more. I will likely layout a more technical description of how my points can be accomplished so let me know if what you see is touched on or not.
I understand that “being here” to you means the people in the discord group that you moderate as that is your bubble. I will share personally, but this statement makes me feel that in your view the 6100 addresses who minted a pooly nft are not “here”.
I see “being here” as people who follows updates/make decisions based on them, follows github issues, reads medium articles, or uses the protocol rather than the 11 people how react to an announcement in discord. Not all people chose to speak in discord.
Personally, I first deposited in the protocol pre 2020 when ellio trades (likely fud tv at the time, i couldn’t find the video, but it is when I owned his EVO coin on tron so likely 2019. I stopped watching in the pandemic.) The way he talked about it stuck with me saying "this is something that could only be done in crypto and I even convinced my lotto playing mother to join at that point. PS, my mom isnt in the discord and doesn’t follow the twitter but I am certain she would have feeling about there the protocol / prizes go from here.
I hate discord and the control/ privileges that come from certain people having permissions. Everyone is welcome to use it, but the number of times that I have been alienated and chose to leave the space you control only enhances the degree of “emotional investment” that has been made by myself. Everyone should have equal opportunity not people who politic on you controlled platform. Hell, pool together makes an effort to find who delegates using platforms like sybil. This acts as a tool to find people who disagree and conduct witch hunts.
Ethereum is going ZK and account abstraction. Pool Together looks to find the voters who disagree. Your likely next words are for safety, which every nation state uses too. The voting power of the token is the tool that you created to make people invested and vote. I see no reason that you need to identify and make them play games to contribute and improve the protocol.
I personally, have been in and out of the discord and tried to get anything beyond talked down to on the first mention of building with pool together 5 times in 4 years. I’ve been here and alienated for 80% of the time.
What I propose while asking for input is an actual autonomous system.
What this could look like is using pool together twab token delegator contracts similar to gauges and provide directional Ve-tokenomic like rewards based on community preference rather than pt inc or generation’s decision of places to incentivize.
(I would add another step, but as mentioned in my option/bonds comment I feel you dismiss based on your previous failures.) Happy to share, but rather save the strategy if any mention of contributions are by default a bad thing.
Additionally, funding builders programmatically without needing to build a reputation before hand through epoch based “hackathon” funding rounds.
I am happy to share the audited contracts that would be a good fit, if we feel the conversation is there. Overall and using bitcoin’s supply predictability as an example, there can be algorithmic tokenomics sharing known variables . The past systems not telling the community the final POOL supply or current system of needing to take calls with gen software team or like/retweet to build on the protocol has gone poorly.
If the community wants to hear more about this system, I would love to share how everything s done on-chain, without conversation, and honestly thing anonymous voting should be included.
Automated spam protection is fair if the rules apply to everyone. I acknowledge that your posts are likely affected by this too, but it should be noted that it was put in place by select people who may still be able to read deleted posts, also can override this protection to delete posts.
In this example, I cant edit, delete, or reword my statements. There are also messages that i deleted, took back, or wish that others don’t see.
You have privilege to delete things that I can not. You may be able to see things that others can not. You are making decisions and creating assumptions through privileged information or a position of power. These are DEFINING statements in why Pool Together has been failing as a DECENTRALIZED protocol. I don’t think anyone should have control over public spaces especially this one. So to say that the convo regarding your power over this medium is not helpful is a flex and abuse of it.
On that note. I would like to request that this forum is achieved on arweave if gov ends or have token voters moderate instead if it continues to serve a public purpose.
Yes, on the surface gov works this way. There are many ways this can happen such the vetokenomic like route where users stake to decide the direction of dao funds routing them into different areas of use or specialized dao’s. In any version of a dao that I mention, this isn’t a forum or discord discussion included. This is speaking with your capital.
There are other ways it could be explained but that is the result that I hope to explore. Rather than majority rules, it becomes a system of inclusion down to the single vote.
Overall, I think allowing the treasury to split into many diverse and nuanced paths creates more economic incentive, connects with more users, and allows weighted investment in principles allowing funding on a results first way over reputation/ buddy mentality.
I’m speaking for me, as I can’t speak for anyone else: I’m truly sorry you seem to feel offended by members of this community.
I actually have no idea where this got off-rails. I felt that people were mostly supportive of what you shared publicly. I reviewed the Discord conversation in question a couple of times and it still feels like a massive misunderstanding to me. No one is interested in putting you down personally. The thing that unites us is the excitement for PoolTogether and its vision.
No one has a benefit from stopping builders building on the protocol. Even more, I’d argue everyone agrees that this is exactly what the protocol needs.
Hey - I would never fade Pooly holders!
I wasn’t trying to attack you with my question. No hidden agenda - the intention is only to understand where you are coming from and what could’ve been done to help you feel better.
Me too! I know and value the importance of lurkers in communities. Attention spans have drastically reduced and society moved from 12 - 24 day news cycles to 12 - 24 hour cycles. Lurkers might be silently consuming content, but beat marketing as they could be your number one IRL advocates, onboarding friends and family.
I’ve entered this community in a similar way as you did. I didn’t know anyone but I had one thing in common with the people that were around: I was massively excited about PoolTogether. Today I still am and I’m perceived as a core-contributor. However, I wasn’t even here when the token dropped.
There is no way around action when wanting to shape a community. The truth is that no one likely knows the true path forward. We can only get there through conversation and actual execution.
I can’t follow you on this one. Sybil is an open source governance and delegate platform. PoolTogether is not affiliated and their service was provided for free. It was never used to orchestrate any witch hunts but to delegate voting power between users in a fully decentralized matter.
We’ve been reviewing all the negative examples, but you seem to forget the positive moments:
$15,000 delegation on Optimism
splash.wtf on the agenda for Swim Meet #157
ptbook.xyz on the agenda for Swim Meet #159
not digging out the several messages from Poolers saying they like what you’re building
From what I perceived is that each time you made the effort to engage with what you’ve built, you also got some feedback and encouragement.
People can’t read your mind - you have to open up to give people a chance to see (and understand) what you’re working on.
If you don’t like the Discord server you can engage with people on Farcaster, Twitter, or whatever platform you choose. The Discord server might not be perfect, but it gives anyone who is interested a chance to tap into concentrated PoolTogether knowledge.
Adding to this, I don’t think it’s fair of you to bad-mouth contributors in public. I will not link to the tweets in question, but I’m sure you’re aware of what I’m talking about.
Do you think we would have this conversation if powers were abused? If this really was the case this thread would probably not exist. The forum is an open platform, just as Discord. Nothing gets deleted and no one gets banned, as long as it sticks to the Code of Conduct.
So does it under the hood! Anything treasury-related has to pass POOL governance. No single person or entity has access. Anything controlled by the governor beta contracts can only be executed through onchain proposals that pass majority and quorum.
Let’s conclude this with a far-fetched and weird example:
Imagine you’re hanging out in the clubhouse of your footie club. There’s no boss, the club just does regular elections to fill some key roles that are necessary to keep the ball running (pun intended).
You’ve been a member of the club for some years now. You and your club mates have been getting together for regular club meetings so often you can’t even tell the number anymore. You showed up for everything: monthly clean ups, tendering the grass of the club’s playing field, renovating the ranks, recruiting sponsors - the list goes on.
Now someone enters the clubhouse: “What’s up - I’ve been watching you all for the past 4 years. I don’t like how things are done and need some money from your club treasury to fix you all up.”
I think we’re in a similar situation here. What can we do? I don’t know - but I figure we all should regularly remind ourselves that it’s always better to act from a place of kindness and constructivism.
If this is the incentive for developers, It funded 3 hours of work.
What’s up the report button and why was Branden able to delete my last forum post when I asked after proposing Playback Finance for a gamified experience ONTOP of Pool Together V5? Yes under a different name because I was alienated and dismissed with only one comment on what was shared, “Good luck with your project”.
Your statement of
is not true.
Yeah, got it. Then it can be distrusted proportionally as i stated.
How about we stick to the actual conversation that I am trying to have here and stop getting off topic? I feel that I proposed
Using the twab delegators to distribute Pool Incentives through a vetokenomic model.
2.have epoch based onchain contribution incentives for builders
While you make no comment on what the entire thread is about. Please stay on topic rather than pitch provenly untrue statements and imaginary scenarios.
Sorry I’m not being kind. It is a result of rude users on Generation Software’s payroll and the blatant ignoring of my words. Your comments are being corrective instead of forward looking.
If it is hard to hear the past, you may need to put on a hardhat so we can get to work. Don’t fade possible future opportunities because you already think you know what is best or because Generation Software has a different plan.
I see no issues with having multiple routes of protocol usage or onboarding. Do you?
We are having this post because this is a problem that the community is facing and you are blowing it off as a disgruntled person. THIS POST EXISTS because you abuse powers and stand at a position of power. My words are a response to yours and generation employees.
Me showing the faults of the systems is bad, but shaming me is ok? Discussing the issues that are ruining the protocol is what should be done here and you don’t get to act like you are “just a community member” when you issue every message as Pool Together across socials.
Letting me post in the discord announcements would be an equal public space. My point is just stop with the politically correct statements and have the convo about what I am proposing.
Ok, lets talk about the ideas that i put forth.
frozen in time. a person ignored when offering solution to two of the dao’s problems without asking for anything but a conversation in the post. Good or bad, a person’s ideas should be looked at without the attached reputation. Today any post I write is ignored. A new person entering is ignored.
Crypto exists to level the playing field for all and remove middlemen. That is not what this dao does, instead it requires a person to jump through hoops and suck up to the leaders to have a voice while claiming to be permissionless.
While I offer value coming in for the dao, the voters want value leaving the treasury. I regress from this request for comment and am insulted that it received one response that wasn’t trying to discredit me due to already having a plan of their own.
To say that this is fair when select teams control all of the messages/posts (often about gov votes) is a joke when one voice controls the platform.
I’m not going anywhere and it looks like there will be likely another quarter of funding because some say so. Only pool together gov will pay a quarter million dollars 5-10% of the treasury to run deploy scripts while ignoring people offering value and the solving of problems.
Here lies Ego > Logic. While I am so passionate about the future of this project that I would cause all of this, the Pool Together DAO looks to reward themselves over having a conversation about what could be. I have exposed how lies, control, and many issues exist and instead of fixing them many take offense and ignore them
