I completly agree with D man its time for a change.
2 Likes
I think this is a fantastic sip, i actually previously posted something similar about tokenomics in forum. Lock up seems monumentally better and needed. We need to get SOV on a positive path or it will fade into the depths with other alts. I know we say it is a governance token but currently its just an alt for 90% of users as our vote means jack shit. I want sovryn to be the be all and end all of my financial freedom ane independance which it plans to be. However the majority of that freedom comes when we have an actual financial ecosystem. Currently tbh we have spent over a year, and i know the dev team are constantly working which is great, but all we have is a dog shit ui/ux with no depositing or withdrawing sizeable amount of coins. No trading pairs. No limit orders. Not much speed. We have an eth bridge but lets be honest apart from liquidity farmers it is unlikely anyone is trading much eth here. We were busy focused on more dog alt coins which i am so grateful we got rid of. However it took up so much time and led to a lot more communication problems and community dissapointment. We are now massively late into beta with no zero. We have failed with 2 seperate marketing teams and now our lead yago is running it with no real experience just a very hard working attitude. Which takes him off more imporant things, number 1 of which being a ui/ux my gran could figure out which sets us back even more. Which i massively appreciate but at this point what are we even marketing? We all hold and love sov for what it could be. FUCK MARKETING. Lets buckle down and make an unbelievably simple ui ux. Lock up the tokens as we spoke of so new people coming in look positively on tokenomics. From here Lets allow decent withdrawls and deposits. Get god damn limit orders up and running. Once people can easily use the platorm we then begin to market something people can and actually want to use. An easy to use trading platform that rewards stakers in btc. Is there anything better sounding than that?? Then BOOM you can get 0% loans on your bitcoin it is like heaven on earth. The potential here is so fucking unbelievable. Great sip proposal. Would recieve yes vote from me.
9 Likes
Hello together,
it seems a big misunderstanding comes from the way BCW is seen here in the community. And to be honest I probably would also be very careful to blindly accept an SIP from us (yeah I am a BCW Premium member).
We got a special with Babelfish, which the outside community was heavily against. We had a special deal to get SOV, which blew up in our faces because some couldnât keep their mouth shut.
So I understand that for any other community member we seem like a big, bad and rich investor group, which is unhappy with SOV and wants to pumpânâdump it.
I can tell you thatâs not true many many times, but if you the general SOV community member thinks this way, thatâs it and thereâs nothing I can do to directly influence that opinion. And I tell you now, that is a valid opinion.
Yet I would like to explain the problems we see with Sovryn and why these three main points were suggested in that SIP. (Please note I am just a simple member and speak only for myself. This is just how I understand these changes)
-
Tokenomics are in the end math. The more tokens are on the market, the less value the token itself holds. The price of SOV is in a downwards trend for months. That itself is not a big problem. Yet it disencourages new investors that just found SOV. The price is going down and the website with its bad design reflects that. Moreover all rewards are paid out as SOV. That means the rewards are becoming less valueable by the day. Would you stake your money in a token which loses value over time and gives rewards in that very same token? I wouldnât if I wouldnât believe in Sovryn. Thatâs why a lockup of the different funds is a good sign to potential investors, which research the project. A token burn would be better for that, but I see the risk in it too. So I actually think the token lockup for 10 years is preferrable. Maybe with a 6 month, 1year, 2.5years realease or something else. The longer the release schedule the better. Just lock the majority of tokens to give SOV potential to grow in price.
-
The removal of the staking lock is not for us to cash out. Instead it should attract new users to the platform.
I understand that the most informed and invested should hold more voting power. I think thatâs a great idea. Yet a new user might just want to try it out and not commit himself to a project he does not know much about.
Yes you can stake for as little as 2 weeks, but you are still locking in the userâs money. Many donât want that. If you believe in the project then it is another topic.
Yet not many people will believe with all their heart in a project they just found. Instead give them the incentive to stake for a longer period by increasing rewards in RBTC/USDT/ETHs and higher voting power. During that time he can learn what Sovryn is all about.
If he wants to stay, he will keep his money staked and gets more voting power. If he wants to leave he will get his money back and loses the voting power. And so far we are very early and most of the voting power is held by early investors, founders and developers. The risk of an attack is extremely low right now. I think it is at least worth considering.
How exactly current stakers are rewarded can be debated. I for one think they should be given higher monthly/by-weekly rewards and voting power instantly, which decreases over time. In that way the power of current stakers should stay somewhat level. -
Enhancement of UI/UX is something anyone can agree on. I will not go into detail here. But a nice and easy UI lets the user research and investigate. With a special feature or two he might come back just to try it out again as itâs fun. UI is the first thing a user sees and that needs to hook him in. I think we are all in agreement here.
So you see, from my point of view these changes are here to increase the user base of Sovryn, give the users more freedom and the SOV token the opportunity to increase in value.
In conclusion, SOV rewards are great, as it is the central token of the Sovryn platform. But they mean nothing, if they are used to sell and decrease the SOV value itself.
Also Sovryn wonât grow without new users. Sovryn should look attractive for newcomers. And newcomers donât like to commit to something they donât know much about.
My 2 cents on this topic
KnowingTree
7 Likes
First of all i want to clear,
I AM NOT PART OF SOVRYN TEAM.
I AM PART OF BCW community.
Thanks @DMAN for this SIP. I would like to share my thoughts.
With 1 I am strongly not in favour of fork and new token generation because it will be againts the project credibility, we are building it on bitcoin and the beauty of bitcoin is that it is permaware. If you are forking now it will negatively impact project, new investors will be reluctant to join because you never know some day the holders decide to fork the project to a new token again and again. I think the second suggetion is perectly fine the locking of 50% team tokens for 10 years.
With due respect @DMAN please try to understand the situation and do not get emotional with the comments of @yago . I think you are too cocky and take it too personal.
On 2 I strongly disagree on the removal of locking period.
On 3 I strongly agree and with you @DMAN
13 Likes
Exactly what hundreds of other projects said which lay in the graveyard. This is about putting Sovryn in a place that is incomparable to what is out there. Not to wait for it in 10 years and hope it achieved when the most basic aspects make no sense right now.
And when the value of SOV is -94% its top that is not a short term price swing. That indicates to you what the community thinks of this project in the way it currently us. Plain and simple numbers
1 Like
Thanks for your well-written, non-aggressive contribution here. So, when toning it down, it may not be so hard to come to common grounds. However, âŚ
On 1. If you like to see the SOV supply reduced, itâs good to suggest a way that doesnât touch the fundamental parameters of the protocol. Beyond locking up core team tokens really long-term, have a look at Yagoâs ideas on this above.
On 2. Sovryn is not an endeavor new users have to directly invest in, have to have a stake in. In the first place, it offers great financial features (lending, trading, zero etc.) that can be used freely. If a newcomer then thinks this is cool and has potential, they can look into staking, reading up all about it and test-stake for 2 weeks. 2 weeks! No real risk at all. All the time to test it out. I donât see a need to sacrifice the âlocked staking voting bitocracyâ balance for such simple purpose.
Thatâs it. The rest we agree on.
2 Likes
Over my dead body. This looks exactly like something I would expect to come from a shady pump and dump group like BCW. I cannot believe Yago even tried to educate them. They are not interested in the proect, obly a short term dump.This âSIPâ would destroy the proect. NO, NO,NO !!!
2 Likes
Awesome idea. Thanks @DMAN this was long due and it is exactly what is needed for Sovryn to recover from the downward spiral we are currently experiencing. Only a strong change in direction and more appealing tokenomics can obtain new investors interests.
Thanks for the insight. 100% backing this initiative!
Great work
1 Like
Changed my mind about supporting SIP in any way, you donât look like a person with a reason - more like a child who doesnât know what NO means. Upon hearing something you donât want to hear you just lay down on the floor and start screaming while swinging your hands and legs up.
Yago pointed out some valid points, instead of engaging in discussion and providing yours - you just trashed him.
Upon reading this feed Iâm certain that you and BCW just want to fill your own pockets rug pulling project:
- lock team and investor funds
- unlock all stakings
- fud a little bit to increase the price
- sell everything you have
No way Iâm supporting it, if you are so certain this SIP will bring back ATH - then buy enough tokens to be able to pass it without yago, whatâs the risk here, huh?
6 Likes
Thanks @yago for wasting our time, not only in one, but in TWO AMAs⌠it is incredibly frustrating and insulting to be lied to our faces when you say one thing and now you radically change your opinion.
I think @DMAN is right and support this SIP, but this project is led by an egotistical team that cannot see that their actions only created a MASSIVE dump on the token price (that is equal to the belief of the project as a whole) and wonât try to do anything different. If they do not want change and they hold all the powerâŚ
How can this be successful? As Einstein said: âInsanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.â
2 Likes
I do want Sovryn to grow - here we agree. We discuss here to shape final proposal. I find some comments very constructive which could lead us to a good compromise.
We agree on other things too, although there are some differences. As I have stated earlier - for me UI and UX are on top of the list and I donât see a reason to have this voted, since to what I read it is being worked on.
The idea to have the treads separated is to have the discussion organized and easy to follow for everyone way. We have over 150 answers here, it will be hard to follow for the most of us.
5 Likes
Max stakers will shoot down this SIP if it ever sees the light of day.
Trying to turn Sovryn into a memecoin to pump the price.
The nerve of BCW.
Weâre comfortable waiting for the products to be released. Go pump that other coin that will âcome and overtake SOVâ.
Seriously.
If Sovryn wins it will be because it delivered on its promise of financial sovereigntyâŚnot because we got so desperate for new buyers that we had to change protocol rules.
5 Likes
A pump and dump group that invested from the start, didnât sell at ATH and kept hodling a -95% move⌠yeah classic pump and dump right?
This sip, which gives a direction btw, should be used to find a compromise to improve Sovryn for the long term. Please learn how to read and read both the amaâs and the sip without prejudice.
The thing that will destroy this project is continuing the same path weâre going. AGAIN, look at BZRX !
Luckily (almost) everyone agrees the UX/UI improvements are desperately needed. This is a first step.
3 Likes
\o/ As one of the loudest ones who constantly raised the issue of the interface last year I am VERY happy to hear that team has finally put this into focus. Lets redo from scratch. Lets make it a happy interface that doesn´t look like the apocalypse is coming in the 80s. Lets make it ultra easy and intuitive to use without clutter. Clear concise modern serious trustworthy fast.
As for Nr.2 I already proposed exactly that. I fully support the lock removal. I am not convinced on the attack vector the team is talking about. Long term stakers are still rewarded with this proposal.
Originally I even had the idea to have two different âstakesâ one is exactly the current way with all voting rights etc. The other is the proposed way with a maximum allowed staking amount per wallet so you don´t get the flash vote attack. I am even thinking that maybe you can only vote if you have you SOV in the normal current staking contract but there is this second new staking way as the one proposed here - but you can´t vote in that contract. You can choose. Lock it up and vote or stay liquid earn more share over time to incentives longer lockups get fee sharing that is a little lower then in the locked contract and you don´t get to vote in the protocol.
as for 1.
fully locked team funds until this project hits a milestone price wise - like 1SOV = 1BTC or something easily reachable to incentivise team to work harder 
4 Likes
You guys really donât know what BCW did for Sovryn, you keep trashing BCW with so little knowledge. Itâs hopeless. At least D would have tried everything.
4 Likes
I am happy to see a lot of discussions regarding this SIP, some of the suggestions sound good others less. As developer I understand it is hard to swallow some of the critique, but please donât think BCW is after a pump and dump, since all of us at BCW who bought SOV tokens are still holding.
I am frustrated with progress, and yes also with the price. That said I believe in the project and want to further invest and that is not typical for a pump and dump imo. Having already been in a couple of pump and dumps caused by the crypto development team I would love SOV to not end that way. I much rather hold tokens of something I am proud of and believe in then hold any coins just because I want to dump them. I canât speak for any of the other members but I personally donât hold and have never held any of the coins which are typical to make a quick buck out of.
I love to see good points being picked from this discussion, the more the better and will wait till than to decide if I invest more or step out, even if that means that I need to unstake.
I wish you all good luck and am looking forward to reading more about the direction of SOV in the near future.
5 Likes
This SIP idea is absolutely correct.
SOvryn should have healthy tocenomics, and in this harsh competitive environment there is minor chance of attracting wider audience without it. So far people (external), who donât know SOV, they look on chart and see typical shitcoin behaviour. Despite fantastic features and plans, SOV may not survive the bear market. As stated, nicely tailored SUPPLY/DEMAND will automatically heal price action, and attract more people on board. Doesnât make sense to spend millions for marketing campaign that will restitute dead.
We need to go to very basis, and as Dman said the core is tokenomics. Since Yago agreed to support the idea, i strongly believe we are on the same page.
Guys! Letâs do it! Letâs show to the crypto community that coin and SOV system, we believed, is not as thousands 1-season coins, that once spiked and never got out of oblivionâŚ
We owe this to each other of us - believers and investors, and we owe this to the dev team.
I will support.
2 Likes
My dear Unikum.
I have been reading the AMAâs and some anwers here.
In my humble opinion this question is very valid here as it is important to get the intentions straight.
Yago, as the visionary is considered to be the founding father of Sovryn, and what father would ever make bad decisions when raising his own child. Own child, beautifull child.
D-Man as the âleaderâ of BCW seems to be considered to be only interested in the money. The pump/dump as I read it here. Strange, because I do not have that idea when reading the AMAâs.
And hey : He did not have to post them openly to us to read it.
So, I find DDREXâs question very valid here because he seems to be a BCWâer. It is a close question, waiting for a simple yes/no. When Yagoâs opinion is NO, D is not the man searching for a pump/dump, D-man can be considered as every single SOVRYNER : a true believer in the project and - like every one of us - hoping on some profit from a Project we believe it is born to succeed.
When that is clearified:
Is it not the best thing to happen that Yago and D are read equally from their support for sovryn.
Because now people are preoccupied in fear that D only speaks from a profit sideâŚ
So, in my humble opinion, I truly believe both have the same level of commitment for SOVRYN to succeed.
And, as Sovryn is developing today, I tend to support the SIP as I see very good things in it.
Sometimes a father becomes overprotective and needs to try another way of education.
To end : This questions is very valid as the intentions of the proposer has to be clarified.
Everyone : forget Yago and forget D
What does our beloved project NEED at this point?
Time is against usâŚ
thank you!
7 Likes
I cannot support these proposals in their current form, but would support a compromise. Tokenomics need an update. This should be carefully considered and possible solutions confirmed in a stand-alone sip.
@yago could you please explain to what extent the issuance of new tokens has already been reduced? More detailed info would certainly be helpful.
Locking up team tokens for 10 years is completely excessive. What about the solution to stretch the vesting of the team tokens to (5-10) years? the great work of the core team needs to be appreciated much more and the current language and disrespect against the core team is an absolute disgrace.
The staking system streams btc to every sov staker weekly and should be kept that way. This is the big joker card of sovryn. Still, I think the idea of the loyalty bonus is pretty smart.
The loyalty bonus should not be applied to the staking system, but to the holders of liquid sov. the longer it is in the wallet, the greater the participation in platform revenue. It would also be conceivable to award voting power to unstaked liquid sov. These holders should also have a say in the bitocracy, albeit smaller than that of long-term stakers that lock-up their tokens.
7 Likes
Hi Theberni
I read your post and have to scratch my head.
Shady with the openess on their AMAâs? You probably did not even want to read them, correct?
I read VT333âs comment.
He has a point. They held trough good, bad and worse.
Does not seem pumpy/dumpy.
I do not know you, but when you really are SOVRYNER you should read everything and come with valid arguments on the matter.