I’m not sure the proper way to have this discussion, but this seems like a good start. The current staking proposal requires that tokens be staked to be eligible for governance voting, which I think is grand. To allow voting of the locked token supply it basically grants an exemption from this requirement to those tokens, allowing them to be voted despite not being staked. I would argue that a much more amicable approach (and one much more likely to appease those upset with the state of the locked tokens) would be to automatically stake all of the locked tokens on behalf of their owners, thus making them eligible for all associated benefits and rewards. They could then be voted without exemption, and holders of the locked tokens could participate in and benefit from this new utility. Yea? Nay?
I think you are doing this properly. The staking proposal is not up for vote on Snapshot so there is still time for discussion on the forum.
I think that the staking proposal is focused on unlocked token holders, they want to incentivize holding vs. buying and selling market fluctuations.
I think the proposal is unclear about the role of locked tokens in regard to rewards. This is the time to seek clarity about whether locked tokens can also be eligible for rewards. Since they are locked they are, by all metrics, staked.
This new proposal is NOT about incentivizing anyone. For those who don’t understand what this new “proposal” means, here it is in a nutshell. WLFI wants ANYONE who buys the token to NOT be able to vote on future proposals for SIX months (then why would you buy it?). The 80% that are STILL locked does NOT count in voting. In essence, they want to dominate the voting and block any dissenters. This is in DIRECT violation of the bylaws. If you want to know why they are pulling this, here’s why.
If you recall, NUMEROUS people were against the last proposal, and they complained loudly. Some comments were “removed”. Yet, before the proposal closed, somehow numerous shills popped up “loving” it, and the voting numbers drastically changed overnight to support it.
Now, do you understand why it’s been 18 months since they incorporated and we STILL have no working website. 16 months since the presale and STILL no working app. $540 million collected and STILL no working help center to answer questions. 27 Billion tokens released and STILL no explanation where the 22 Billion additional came from. We have co-founders hacked (they won’t say who). The last buy/burn was almost 6 months ago. The market cap is now BELOW $5 billion (how with a 1:1 ratio?). And now, they want to dissuade people from buying the token because they can’t vote. I could only imagine what they have lined up for the next 6 months that they don’t want anyone able to vote on.
This company is going down in a SLEW of Class Action Lawsuits. And, they know this. This is why they have NOT unlocked the remaining 80%. They will sell their tokens before you sell yours. And to you trolls/shills, before you call this BS, prove which point is NOT true.
That’s an interesting interpretation, and one I hadn’t really considered. Perhaps they’ll offer some clarification on how the locked tokens will engage (or not engage) with the rewards mechanism.
Ok, starting with:
This is blatantly false. The proposal states clearly: “Holders of locked tokens will continue to be eligible to participate in voting.”
This is not necessarily wrong, but I think it is a deceptively negative portrayal of the situation. WLFI Market is live, and at this moment I am earning USD1 and WLFI rewards by taking advantage of that. There is clear and measurable forward motion. This newest proposal is also forward motion in my opinion, but I do think it could be better implemented. Or at least better defined.