Yes but dman will give codes ONLY to the premium members NOT the free ones.
many people here - both in the sovryn and whispers communities need to check their entitlement and privilege biases.
just because one supported or invested in one early stage project does not grant a right or an obligation to receive preferential treatment - it goes agains the whole ethic of sovryn, which did its best to provide a “fair launch” to smallholders by doing PUBLIC presales.
I STRONGLY suggest that babelfish (or ANY project launching on the Sovryn Origins platform) should NOT provide any “pre-sale at a discount” opportunities to sov holders or trading communities PRIOR to or DURING the launch period.
What i do STRONGLY suggest is that babelfish reserve a percentage of tokens at launch for those communities who can demonstrate having invested in Sovryn at any time up to the public offering.
How this can be done technically (essentially whitelisted wallet addresses - currently approximately 8000 on sovryn) in the UI would be a question for the Sovryn devs to solve. It would mean that platform remains open to the public at large, with a user journey that allows for whitelisted addresses to get access to the pool of tokens reserved for them in a random lottery (ie, not “first come first served” or multiple attempts from the same wallet. It would require a snapshot of wallet addresses prior to the sale, so that new users could not have access to that pool of reserved tokens.
To make this additionally fair and inclusive, the “snapshotting” deadline of wallets on sovryn should be announced in advance of the snapshot, and THIS information should be announced publicly via the sov and whispers communities to “get their friends and family in”. These communities should be PROMOTING these token offerings to the wider public, as informed advocates, not trying to secure a guaranteed way to keep others from getting a share. This type of behaviour disgusts me to the core.
I also suggest that there be a cap on the value that can be purchased by a single address, as was done with sovryn presales, so that the largest possible number of smallholders can get a piece of the pie. Purchasing from this reserved token pool should not disqualify a user to purchase additional tokens offered for sale during the public offering.
16 Likes
I would say that state of greed is a powerful motherf***er with no boundaries.
2 Likes
Hi guys, hi to all SOV and FISH community.SIP proposal should allow also LP providers and stakers after 1 st may to be able to participate in presale of FISH.If you provided liquidity with all SOV which you had until that moment and you withdraw them on 2 nd may and stake them, I guess that it s unfair to be prohited to participate in this presale.
Nice project, nice team, but please build up this SIP proposal in respect for ALL stakers and LP providers.
I try to argue for what is best for the project.
Engaged communities is important, and they must be treated well, but for a project to succeed in the sense that it appreciates in price, you need people onboard that can HODL until the fair price.
For instance, we valuate Sovryn at a billion dollars marketcap.
Therefore, we don’t really sell tokens before we have reached the fair price. This is because we believe this is the minimal fair value of the project.
Without disciplined and visionary holders, Sovryn might got frontrun by shortsighted fools and speculators.
Instead, a considerable amount of the circulating supply is in safe custody of strong holders that will not dump.
We enter Sovryn early because we believe, and we hold until our believe has manifested in a product that is worth much more than when it was at the early, experimental stage where we onboarded.
At the point where the value is realized, and the product is much safer and clear to others, they can pay us for our trust and risk by buying SOV at a fair price of the time.
If you look at venture capital and compare it to blockchain whispers, blockchain whispers is decentralized.
We are not suit and tie mofos, we are a loving bunch. Many of us trade in our underpants. That’s our degree of non-institutional.
To secure that the project is in this kind of custody is the reason why premium whispers onboard the presale. We need to have most of the tokens, since we cannot vouch for the hand quality of public channel. It is home to aspiring premiums though.
Public channel is a great place to get word of great projects and join in carrying them to full fruition. Many amazing people join here, once premium has established the foundation. The public channel secures a steady inflow once it is safer for the project to onboard more people.
This is the value blockchain whispers brings to a project. Where will the casuals be when things take an unexpected turn and their investment is 50% in minus? Probably panicselling.
I can tell you where blockchain whispers will be: we will be holding. For years if necessary. In deep minus, strong in the storm. Ask bzx community if you want proof.
This is the value blockchain whispers bring. We are there in storm and sunshine, and we see good projects to fruition. You cannot achieve the same quality of holders if you randomly distribute to a bunch of degenerates in a raging bullmarket.
I am both a Blockchain Whispers Premium and a Sovryn Genesis holder. Of course I will be interested in a good allocation in Babelfish, but I have no particular stake in it. I don’t need it - I have Sovryn, this turned my life around already. I am trying to argue what is good for the project.
From that transparent perspective, it is easy to say that if I cannot take an advantageous position, that lowers my stake in a project. It is less safe for me to enter, more difficult to hold. My threshold for pain is lower, meaning the price has less space to drop before it reaches the point where I have to sell.
Aside from entering in early stages of development, here is the argument for giving a particular group a discount: the sheer value they add by holding with discipline. Good holders is part of the fundamentals for a project to develop on the market.
I have said my piece and I am not going to fight for an allocation. I wanted only to share perspective.
6 Likes
As a further comment, I am not in alignment with the idea of giving privileges to communities that invested in Sovryn pre-public offering.
This gives permanent advantage to a static group. Those that have since joined and added value by their contribution deserve a shot as well.
Again, I am genesis holder, so I would benefit from the “Sovryn OG only” privilege, but I don’t think it’s a good way to go for projects. It should be dynamic in my opinion.
Gonna edit in here:
As W4rdy says, people shouldn’t discount the advantage of having BCW onboarding a project. Many of us do more than hold, we actively engage in communities and do what we can to each contribute to building beautiful dreams.
5 Likes
iordanis_777
Yes but dman will give codes ONLY to the premium members NOT the free ones.
With his view that it rewards those who show commitment and support to projects, which new projects sorely need, in an attempt to avoid those who just want a quick buck and happy to dump and run, but is open to everyone.
The second round is ONLY open to those who have staked SOV, so same principle, but you don’t seem to have a problem with that, why not?
I’m guessing that you are included in that, so is fine with you, but massively contradicts the point you’re trying to make, which in that light simply wreaks of jealousness and self entitlement.
Ultimately it’s not your decision, so get over it and let people focus here on the points of the SIP that do matter.
2 Likes
it’s strange because you missed the cutoff date
The bigger question is, why did you choose to stake only from May 2 when you have been in SOV since Genesis… an educated guess would suggest you’re just hopping on the hype train instead of being involved with the community
If i may ask… why then did Sovryn not do what you are asking of Babelfish now
why the double standards of expectation
I have read the SIP and so far so well, but there is just one thing that doesn’t really make sense to me.
Why only SOV stakers? I have participated in the LP and I had to put in A LOT of RBTC to support the project and I still have a few days to wait for it to finish. It is somehow frustrating that we all participated in this project but only the stakers will get the allocation for Fish. If this had been the case, I would have put all my SOV in staking and left all my BTC for other investments. I know staking and LP are 2 different things but you must understand my frustration. Any thoughts on that?
7 Likes
No no - SOV LPs should/will get recognized as priority just as much as SOV stakers and I’ll push for that.
7 Likes
I do like the idea of SOV LPs and SOV Stakers getting recognised for their effort, as far as post-launch promotions are concerned
4 Likes
It’s good to hear such point of view. I discovered the existence BCW via this thread and my first thought was “A closed group sharing insiders information”. That looks wrong. Thanks for the explanations.
Where I think it it fails is that you generalize the “Public” having weak hands compared to BCW members. Even if 90% was indeed weak hands, there is still 10% that are not and probably close to BCW 's investment philosophy. What about them then? I consider myself as a long term holder, believing in the value/nature of the projects I’ve been investing in and kept them for years because of that. I don’t trade, I invest in projects that convince me.
I’m part of that public and that means I wouldn’t have the same advantage as the members of BCW. Is that fair? The goal of BCW is probably good, but its exclusivity slows the growth of the BCW ideal: To have more people to invest long term in valuable projects.
That’s what I particularly like with SOV: The whole community/stakers have a say and can weight into the discussion decide together. I feel like anyone has a chance to have a say. It feels very democratic.
(By the way, hello all, I just made an account to answer this message. What convinced me is how how much open and fair this community seems to be).
2 Likes
I have understood that a minimum amount of 1000 SOV is considered for this BabelFish SIP. I would be dissapointed if that demand would be included. I stepped into Sovryn during the presale but did not have the funds to buy a 1000 SOV. I bought from what I had 575 SOV, and as soon as my SOV got unlocked I staked all of them for the maximum period of time. The amount of SOV you have says not everything about your dedication to the ideal of staying Sovryn. I had less than 1000 SOV but gave a 100% dedication.
Don’t exclude the smaller BabelFishers from staying Sovryn.
5 Likes
1k SOV minimum? That would be so unfair (rich getting richer and nothing else)
4 Likes
I think the amount of SOV staked should not matter. The date of staking should matter. If being an active telegram/discord/forum reader and interested in Sovryns future, you should have been discovered Babelfish a long time ago and that you must stake SOV to take part of the sale. Its in their first SIP draft.
5 Likes
Yes, I totally agree. Amount shouldn’t matter much, but date of staking (and the length as well) is the most important metric imo since this shows who are really commited and believe in the project(s) and who are staking just to get allocation and make a quick buck.
Regarding BCW getting the 1st day sale allocation - imo that’s okay since they were really early and are very commited as well.
1 Like
Thats a good concept. I would ask you to take the Sovryn aspect a step further:
In effect the SOV token holders own Sovryn. Why? We can vote for or against anything. So if Bablefish wants to use our platform (which is awesome btw) they still need to get the ppl to agree. Otherwise theoretically I could rally the digital-nomadic-troops and we could create a SIP to block them from launching.
This is why discussion is important. When it happens the people are happy. Also why the delegate system is so exciting. These sitatuions may occur daily in the future. Side note → we may one day have delegates with a payment system. Like I hired full time politician. But that’s a whole other idea.
No particular comment , great project guys !! Love it!
Completely agreed , I second this!