This Tuesday, January 12, at 15:00 Moscow time, Free TON Weekly Meetup #36 took place on Zoom. This time, the agenda included the following issues: new proposals, token request from the Korean Sub-governance, DGO Sub-governance updates and best practices for partnerships at the end of 2020. Also, half of the conference time was devoted to the Q&A session. In this article you will find an overview of the results of the meetup.
The first meetup in 2021 began with a discussion of general news. 4 new proposals were published on the forum, and voting on some of them ended right before the meetup:
- African Sub-governance proposal. The team has already created a landing page, Facebook, Instagram and YouTube accounts. This could serve as a good example for other emerging sub-governances – the activities started even before any token requests. The proposal was accepted by on-chain voting.
- Chinese Sub-governance proposal. Most of the initiators of this proposal have a strong financial background, they know the market and the culture pretty well. This proposal has also already been accepted.
- Token request based on KPI from African Blockchain Institute. All the goals set for the first stage of the partnership were achieved much ahead of the schedule. Now ABI is asking for tokens for the next round.
- Decentralized PR contest. This is a new idea that has already caught the attention of several PR agencies. It received positive feedback from the community and was also accepted by voting.
The draft of the last proposal was drawn up by Mitja Goroshevsky, so it was him who took the responsibility to talk about the contest in more detail. The problem with the proposals that were made earlier is represented by the KPI. If you can’t calculate KPI algorithmically, you need someone to manually evaluate them – but that doesn’t work, especially in a decentralized community. Therefore, the question of measuring KPI in PR using algorithmic methods arose, and it eventually formed the basis of this proposal. If it’s implemented, the jury will not have to evaluate the work of the participants: they will only have to make sure that the technical terms have been met. Such a system is functioning now in Wiki SG. The proposal also implies that there will be a DeBot through which participants will submit their applications for contests and which will regulate many aspects. The partnerships that the project currently has are not very helpful in spreading the word about Free TON.
Then the participants of the meeting discussed the DGO Sub-governance news. The contest for the development of an SMV smart contract system has passed. It received several applications, not counting one from TON Labs, and some of them are told to be of high quality. Another announcement covered the launch of the second part of the contest, dedicated to another area of governance – the jury selection system and voting on applications. The proposal will be published by the end of this week, and if everything goes well, it will be launched early next. In addition, the sub-governance will soon launch a contest for the development of a frontend.
Then participants discussed a token request from the Korean SG for contests that were held some time ago, when there were not enough tokens in its budget. Accordingly, the winners did not receive their rewards. Moon Young Lee, as a representative of the Korean community, commented on the situation: the request was published on January 7, and the requested amount (702,750 TON) includes tokens for 6 contests already held (for creating animated stickers, etc.). According to active community members, these contests should have been held, but there was a misunderstanding regarding the technical procedures – this will not happen again in the future. Moon also highlighted the fact that 80% of all token transactions are made in South Korea, as he said, in part due to the held contests. The meetup participants agreed, admitting the strong influence of the Korean SG, but also stated that this situation should not be repeated in any of the sub-governances.
The next topic for discussion was the community problems, which arose in 2020, and ways to solve them. The floor was taken by Alexander Filatov, who published a post dedicated to this topic on the forum. The network was launched only 8 months ago, and in 2020 it was necessary to give impetus to the development of the community as a whole, and at the very beginning problems cannot be avoided. The governance system and the meritocratic distribution system for Free TON tokens are based on 3 pillars: sub-governance, partnerships and contests. A lot of things have been done: about 80 contests have been held, 22 partnerships have been concluded and 17 sub-governances have been formed. Partnerships should add real value to the network by adding new ways to use tokens. This is an objective requirement that must be clear and measurable, and at the moment, not all partnerships are in compliance with it. It’s also necessary to either significantly reduce the upfront payments, or completely eliminate it, with some rare exceptions. This will help prevent the loss of funds in cases where partners do not fulfill their obligations. It is also partly a matter of trust and responsibility – if partners are willing to start work without pre-funding, it means that they believe in the benefit and success of the project.
For larger and more expensive partnerships, vesting should be considered: if people receive tokens and immediately exchange them on the exchange, there can be only one conclusion. It is ineffective to tolerate this behavior.
As for the contests, Alexander proposed to reduce the number of prizes – situations are not uncommon when one participant submits 5-10 applications, which is pretty good if all of them are of high quality. But when there are 100 prizes in the contest, the same people get several of them – this should be minimized. Contests should be aimed at attracting new people and teams, and not be held among the same people. In addition, he mentioned the need to “clean up” the jury and exclude people who do not participate in voting or vote with ulterior motives.
It follows from the previous issue that the initial members and jury of different Sub-governances should include different people, both in terms of geographical structure and competencies.
Participants of the meetup also briefly discussed the proposal to exclude the jury which was posted on the forum. Since it contains mistakes, it is necessary to reformulate the text and publish it again.
After that, the meeting participants moved on to discussing the African Sub-governance and the African Blockchain Institute. The representative of SG thanked the community for the opportunity and assistance provided during the formation of SG.
Then the representative of Kuna.io took the floor and made a few suggestions: first, it is obvious that the network now needs more practical use cases for the development of the project. Second, he asked if he could request more tokens for distribution. He was advised to consider participating in contests as a way to obtain TON Crystal.
This completed the main part of the call, and the Q&A session began.
Q: I participated in SMV and Ethereum bridges contests. I am having a problem with C ++ code compilation. And since the last two weeks of the competition coincided with holidays, it was difficult to get support. I submitted an application and it should be rejected according to the rules, but I really want to participate in these contests. I didn’t get a chance to correct my application because the network was down during the holidays. I am asking for the opportunity to finish my work.
A: If the application is not fully ready yet, this is unlikely to be possible. We will discuss this at the next DGO call. There will be other contests in which you can participate.
Q: How is emission determined in the configuration parameters? I was initially told that it is defined as an additional percentage to the existing emission
A: You can view the configuration parameters right now and see the cost of one block. This is emission. It is not defined as a percentage.
Q: Is there a way to punish the ‘Minter gang’?
A: Yes, it’s called Governance 2.0
Q: What action will be taken against unhelpful partners like Merkle Tree?
A: This is your opinion, but it is better to ask questions in the correct form. They will publish the partnership materials next week, and they are now finalizing them.
Q: What’s happening with Web & Design Sub-governance (orig. subgov of pictures)? Can we dissolve it?
A: From my point of view, if a person writes the way you write, then he is no better than those whom he criticizes. If you want to get feedback from the community, learn how to address it appropriately. Such questions are unacceptable. Instead of criticism, it is better to show what you have done.
Q: When will the Korean sub-government be disbanded?
A: How many tokens would you put into voting on this issue?
Q: Do you understand that mentioning Minter is black PR for TON?
A: First, it’s Free TON, not TON. No, I don’t understand that.
Q: When will the official statement regarding Kabanov’s actions be published?
A: What is an “official statement”? By whom? What actions are we talking about? I don’t even want to discuss it. We have a community in which there is no directorate. Many people are angry now, and I understand their emotions, but this is a path of development. What happens when there are a billion people in the community with their tokens, their thoughts, their ideas? Let everyone have the right to express their opinion.
Q: The rules for allowing a proposal to voting are too vague, aren’t they? It is not clear why some of them are allowed to vote and some are not.
A: Everything is very clear. The forum is a place for discussion, not for voting (at least not yet). At the moment, it is not a tool for transitioning to voting. If an idea is gaining popularity, and not only in comments on the forum like “yes, I like it” or “no, I don’t like it”, but on the basis of well-reasoned comments, then a vote is organized. If you are waiting for the rules, then you are in the wrong place.
Q: Stop making useless contests where the awards don’t match the results.
A .: This is an organic process. If you look at all the contests from the beginning, you will see a huge difference between the first ones and the last ones. This is progress. They will look even better in a year. This is a scientific method: a hypothesis is developed, tested, the results are summed up – and this process is repeated over and over again until the solution approaches the ideal, which it will never achieve, because people are imperfect by nature. But our goal is development. What is a useless contest for you?
Q: The Korean SG encountered difficulties when applications from non-Korean participants were rejected.
A: As I understand it, this applies to the Coineal exchange. This is their exchange and their rules, Free TON has nothing to do with this. It isn’t responsible for what a private organization does.
Q: Free TON, I love you!
A: We love you too.
Q: Don’t you think that at the moment the creation of new sub-governances is a waste of funds? We haven’t seen results from them yet.
A: I think you do not understand the essence of sub-governances. This is the only way to expand the community.
Q: Why weren’t there any announcements about voting on new proposals?
A: Obviously, you just don’t follow the website. When an offer is published, it appears on the site, where you can familiarize yourself with it. Your awareness is your responsibility.
The meeting ended after Mikhail Kabanov’s comment:
“I wanted to say something, but nobody seems to listen. I don’t have anything to add.”
The full version of the meetup can be found here.