Hi guys, there is a lot of people sharing this article in the Discord:
This is one of the best articles I’ve read and love ever recommendation made.
Lets show the power of the frog nation to get this in front of Dani and make these changes so that Wonderland becomes the biggest thing out there!
What a great mind and wonderful insight and solution to our problem. I 100% agreed.
I love the idea of hiring a professional team to assist Dani! Plus a new coin would be less confusing then having 3 separate TIME/MEMO/WMEMO. Making users hold the token for 30 days to receive rewards helps to reduce sell pressure.
Is this the famous danku_r from Youtube? I watch you all the time dude. Great to see the support
I think I just earned an M.B.A. reading that. Nineteen minutes well spent. This should be read by every frog. This encapsulates a lot of everything that has been discussed and then adds some more layers to truly paint this project’s potential.
If they want new teammates, they will hire them, this is not a problem… I think… They are creators, soo is there anybody more qualified in this? I am always for improvement:) I read it, its really good writing…
100% agreed, I really like the rage quit option.
I read the article and agree with alot of his points. But i disagree with not doxxing managing team. Every position should be doxxed and full transparency should be mandatory for all positions held starting with the professor if he really wants to hold a position. Anonomity is a double edged sword and will be abused again and again in human society. Robbers always wear masks…
Edit: I would like to even propose anyone who proposes a WIP release basic information like LinkedIn page.
Yes, frankly a new coin and maybe a new name…if we want new investors
I agree with the proposal. The only point I disagree with is ending APY. As said, it is a Marketing tool, and we need Marketing. It also gives the small investor like me a shot at a monthly income. WL’s promise is that we could have a monthly income, if we wanted to, through APY or let it pay for the future. WL has to have a range of income solutions for its user: APY and others. It could be a lower APY yes, where the person would have to spend some time (30 days) before applying. INVICTUS and KLIMA (where I also invest) suffered big losses with the market drop, however they changed some concepts, changed % of APY and are now solid again. These are examples of tokens with very low treasury. If they did, why can’t we keep APY? So I agree with the proposal, but I disagree with withdrawing the APY. But I agree to create anti-whale and anti-shark femmatents.
Yes, I agree with you, let’s keep APY
Well thought out and Excellent Proposal. Hope the Protocol will read it and incorporate many of it’s ideas
100% great article with great content , should be a proposal
I’d like to know who ‘The Professor’ is to be honest.
We don’t want to fall foul of the same issues we’ve already had.
Other than that his proposals look pretty solid.
Really great article. I love the clarity of his thinking and agree with almost all of them. I don’t think he has offered himself up for hire though.
Frogs, lets stay united against whales and sharks!
He is right that we can’t trust Bastion trading to deal honestly with our treasury, and not front run all of our transactions with their own money.
Thanks for sharing - that was a very good read.
My background is very similar to the author. I currently run a US based venture fund (200+ investments). Prior to that, I launched a few startups from 1995 to 2003, got lucky with a couple of them going public, hooked on with some hedge funds in the mid 2000s to fix their broken toys (public company turnarounds) before moving on to my current role.
As such, I can relate to the author and I am impressed that they would take the time to put that together. Honestly, I wouldn’t have. In fairness, that is probably my biggest concern about their bonifides - but there is no getting around the fact that it was a balanced, thorough, and well thought out proposal. The best I’ve seen thus far, and one I would support.
I believe in the project (always have) - not the gimmick. I hope that this approach, or something like it, is considered in this case. Unfortunately, the two things sorely lacking over the last 36 hours seem to be communication and direction - so, unless that changes soon, it’s hard to see anything productive coming out of this.
One last comment - Over the years I’ve watched hundreds of founders burnout. It looks a lot like what I’m seeing here - and it generally doesn’t end well. Dani sounds like he’s defeated. I get it. Startups are hard even on good days - and this has been ugly of late. However, if he’s hit a wall, then I would expect very little movement on any proposal that doesn’t get let him walk away completely. Hope I’m wrong.
The professor’s plan makes the most sense to me. He has a grip on the situation and his opinions do not seem motivated by greed it’s just plain analysis. He has the ability to rationally explain in ways that are appealing to the layman. I do not like Wonderland 2.0 or the Bastion proposal for various reasons but I like what the Professor wrote. I’d back his plan of action and any recommendation he may have.
Very well thought out and logical proposal. To go forward effectively we need a community with a common goal, can’t be one driven by anger and spite that splits the DAO down the middle.