Learn & Earn - Pundi X & Function X

[zaccheah]

Hi guys,

Thank you for this, quality posts.

@SCENE

So far, from what I’ve seen, the community is very eager, maybe too eager, they say YES to almost every project that applies without thinking straight.

I hope the community can sit back and try to think from a business point of view. The first few projects that goes live once EVM is implemented cannot fail if we want to catch the attention of VCs/AIs.

So please do not accept every project that applies just because you are eager for something to happen. There is a reason why the passing rate for funding is less than 5%.

I read a few times what @SCENE wrote, it captures the truth, however unpopular it may be. Respect you for the courage.

We have two public proposals that didn’t pass (Nammy’s plugin and DAOVerse) and one passed (Kronos). I hope one day Nammy, Alchemist and Shady will apply again - it will be our pleasure to see your projects on Function X.

@FrenchXCore

• CSP is directly related to blockchain rules, voting on proposals and if a proposal passes both criteria of minimum participation (40%) and YES (50%), the proposal will collect the amount requested.

• EGF is related to an FX address managed by the foundation, and is not linked directly to proposals (can’t be per blockchain rules). This means the foundation (controlling the EGF private key) can directly send the $FX to the proposer. Rules have now been set-up in the EGF guidelines, but EGF is still “privately”-controlled (private key). If we were to consider that the EGF is directly controlled by the voting power, then the EGF fundings should be donated fully to the CSP.

That’s correct.

We have to admit that when we wrote the whitepaper, CSP and EGF was not 100% clear, now it is as what @FrenchXCore wrote and i quote above.

We will produce a report of our company’s holding, EGF holdings etc, staked and unstaked. Many of the addresses are unknown to us hence are public addresses, including institutions that prior owned $npxs and $npxsxem that converted. @FrenchXCore has set the stage of doing such a detailed excel, your effort will be helpful.

@FrenchXCore

Conclusion #1 : IMHO, if the details are not public, the fund is not public. I sincerely do not have any problem with the team controlling the EGF, but it should be considered as “team’s funding” then, not community’s.

EGF can be used for team’s funding, but it is not the team’s fund. If the team wants to use it, we should apply like anyone else.

It is the team’s dream that the current team does not carry the majority of the development and abled people can jointly develop.

@FrenchXCore

Conclusion #3 : Only 1.5% expense found in 3 years for product & marketing and engineering. No details.

Correct, the foundation have used our own money more than we have claimed via governance from the funds (CSP and EGF), including 3-years of development cost, I think it’s important for the team to also put up governance voting to ask for funds one day. It won’t happen this week or this quarter, we will think about this when we do 10x.

@FrenchXCore

• Action 01: Deposit all unassigned EGF funding into CSP and provide full transparency towards any action led using the already-assigned EGF funds (past and future), in order to not consider this EGF as team’s.

We hope to transition into a full DAO one day and have taken active steps towards it. Transferring EGF to CSP will happen eventually but not this quarter.

• Action 02: Accelerate & fund private & community developments, and make all projects public (FxWallet, FxExplorer, etc.) to allow for community-driven developments and bounties.

A lot of code are public in github, please fork, contribute and apply for EGF. I’ve said here, here, here, here that we need developers and non-developers. Our engineer have also written one of the most detailed guideline in the industry to help you get the funds.

• Action 03: Burn or airdrop the EBT funds and delegation rewards to current non-team delegators. A snapshot could easily be made for that. That would allow to not consider the EBT as team’s.

If in the case it is not spent we should make a meaningful program to reward it to active participants, preferably on future actions, there is a likelihood that we have from another wallet and the funds was NOT reimburse back to the company.

@Riz_Truth

Do not burn the tokens
As it will be an internal ecosystem removal, it can negatively impact the market capitalization of Function X and we would slide down the rankings even further (>300). We are still the top 2%. This would be bad for the investors ROI overall.

Agree, I am also against arbitrary burning of tokens, unallocated tokens can be used in much more meaningful ways, such as performing task that can be rewarded to active users. I am also against overly doing arbitrary random airdrops, it can also be done in better ways.

Finally, thanks for taking time during your festives (Good Friday, ramadans, weekends) on the forum, we are stronger because we have you.