Hi,
I think give a good percentage, like 20%-40%, for bitocracy will atrack new participants in sovryn bitocracy and consequently new investidors to BOS, is a win win game. The community is the power of cripto.
3 Likes
Using the Sovryn Community to tweet about it.
1 Like
Just for the record this is outright fraud Yago. You sold us into financial investments based specifically on the detailing of these plans for Sovryn
4 Likes
Obvious miscommunication. The response of the community simply proves that there has been miscommunication.
Yago, you should maybe try: âHey, I understand that some of you expect BitcoinOS to be an integral part of Sovryn and directly and continuously linked to $SOV; but good reasons have emerged to do things differently. Let me explain what these reasons are and what things currently look like. Also let me emphasize that assumption still holds for Sovryn Layer which will be an integral Sovryn project. Apologies to those who made decisions on the assumption that BitcoinOS would be a Sovryn project.â
Instead you say: âat the same time I have been saying again and again that BOS is being built externallyâ, pissing people off because this is just incorrect, and just the community being so surprised should make you pause and think about how things were communicated; given the response of the community, if you dig your heels in and insist that it has been clearly communicated, youâre basically implying that weâre all stupid and canât read or listen.
This communication thing is not that hard, especially with a willing community. The way things are communicated does so much unnecessary damage, itâs just sad.
People here are discussing the 10%. But from what I understand, this is just a separate team and a separate project and we have no grounds to demand anything, and the question of this SIP is really whether we are willing to accept whatever this external team is willing to grant Sovryn holders/stakers (which happens to be a mere 10%), to which the answer is of course yes, better to get something rather than nothing.
12 Likes
Everyone was under the impression that the team had been building BitcoinOS. 
For the stake of the discussion, who is the âexternal teamâ? how many parties are involved in BitcoinOS? do we have any other community contributing to the BitcoinOS?
7 Likes
We havenât been given any names other than yourself saying youâre deeply involved.
Advertising on Twitter that weâve been a part of building BOS.
In our CC #60 talking about financials and supporting BOS.
Also in CC #60 23:56 âthis is what weâre trying to do, this is what weâre trying to buildâ
Listeners and sovrynâs have been led into believing this is something sovryn has been heavily involved in.
9 Likes
In the announcements it was said that Sovryn is a true decentral organisation. And the BOS team wants to use that.
A DAO only works with a high quality community.
I think this is one of the biggest assets of Sovryn, a community of very loyal and intelligent people, together fighting for the mission of Sovryn: to build a world on Bitcoin.
For our information we completely rely on the core team as we donât have nearly the same information as they have.
We put our trust in the core team and we invest our hard-earned money in the SOV token (just like the developers we also have jobs and work hard).
Clearly, the community feels the information we received in the beginning of the year around BOS is completely different that the information we receive now.
A lot of us even bought the SOV token in the beginning of the year at a high price based on the information that was given to us.
We can talk about this for weeks, however if so many intelligent people feel like this, something went very wrong. And it doesnât help that some Sovryn teammembers do receive the BOS tokens.
From the discussions here it is clear that the community is of the opinion that coming from 100% of the BOS value, to now 10%, makes a lot of us very unhappy.
I hope we can increase the percentage to a level which makes the community happy, so we can look forward again and together build the world on Bitcoin.
10 Likes
could you provide some public x post or community call saying that the BitcoinOS is being built externally?
5 Likes
how is the progress of the Sovryn layer? is it devnet ready?
1 Like
Yes. I agree. Thanks.
This was an honest mistake on my part. I have been saying it is an external team to everyone I have discussed this with - but clearly I have not discussed in depth widely enough. It was blind spot to me that this understanding had not percolated more broadly. Everyone I spoke to understood this to be the case. I over generalized and assumed that everyone understood it this way.
2 Likes
again, whom ever is on the sovryn payroll should forfeit their BOS tokens! they have already got paid for it.
BOS has a current Devnet. Sovryn Layer does not yet have one. I think thatâs still several weeks away.
2 Likes
I think the answer to that is well enough to attract developers who are competent, visionary, and all in on the idea. They need to be compensated well enough to choose this project over many others they might consider working on.
If BOS is going to be treated separately from SOV I think
-
SOV needs a new roadmap, to evaluate the cost/benefit of specific items in the SIP, and where to negotiate
-
SOV should open itself up to working with additional Bitcoin L2s, to get a Sovryn Layer + Dex on promising platforms outside of BitcoinOS
My 2c on potential roadmap items and the SIP:
- The only engineering effort SOV should commit to BOS is the effort required to launch Sovryn Layer. I see this as a win-win between BOS & SOV. Beyond this, eng effort for SOV should be dedicated to SOV
- SOV should commit resources to partnering with additional Bitcoin Rollups. Ideally, weâd have a dex + sovryn layer on multiple systems, driving SOV adoption (e.g. SOV on BitcoinOS + Citrea + AlpenLabs)
- We should finish the Dex on RSK
- I think the POWA squad has been the bright spot of 2024. We should keep the gas on this initiative.
4 Likes
I think it should also be acknowledged that Sovryn marketing time and effort have been invested in BitcoinOS â creating a web page and other documents and strategically promoting the project in various channels.
All of these investments are part of the reason a certain percentage allocation should be made to Sovryn. 10% is being proposed. No one has made a quantitative argument for 10% or for any other share yet.
3 Likes
Given that most people believed that BitcoinOS was a Sovryn project, it is hard to deny that this has been communicated very poorly. Yago has acknowledged that.
I think we also have to acknowledge that this idea evolved over time. There has been talk about creating another chain for a long time as weâve bumped up against the limitations of Rootstock. Talk began about a Sovryn chain or Sovryn layer, and then I believe that morphed into the idea of a larger, interoperable system of chains weâre now calling BitcoinOS.
But Iâll say I think itâs a bit over the top that people are acting as though this distinction between Sovryn and BitcoinOS suddenly came up this week out of the blue. Weâve been saying for several months now that BitcoinOS would be a public good. By definition that means separate from Sovryn. This issue arose very publicly months ago and was loudly debated and protested even at the time. Hereâs an example in the forum where I responded to some of the comments and quoted from the wiki page, which laid all this out months ago:
https://forum.sovryn.com/t/bitcoinos-fees-for-sov-stakers/3101/2
Some of the people who are claiming that the distinction of the projects is an entirely new message are the same people who loudly protested some of the same ideas back in February.
So, in summary, I think we have a case of:
- poor communication
- an evolution of the concept
- inexplicable amnesia on the part of some community members
4 Likes
What I would love to see is someone stepping up with a quantitative argument for a specific percentage allocation of BOS for Sovryn. âI feel like it should be 30%â is just not a very compelling argument. Neither is âI feel 10% is fair.â
@yago can you break down the plan for 100% of the BOS? All I see is a 10% allocation for Sovryn, 20% for future development, and up to 36% for sales. What about the other 34%?
Also, where does the money from sales of the 36% go? Iâm trying to distinguish that from the 20% for future development.
3 Likes
Iâm asking you this question because the following is not clear to me: Why is this SIP necessary?
I think no smart contract will be changed and no Treasury funds will be used. What other reasons justify an SIP like this?
1 Like
Sovryn will need to cooperate with Bitocracy, Exchequer, marketing, and development if we agree. Seems necessary for a SIP to me.
4 Likes
Thank you, Onedigit. Always so judicious and sensible in your contributions. Your question to Yago about the BOS tokenomics was equally spot-on.
2 Likes