Likes - Activity - BunsanMuchi - Algorand

Governance Period 14, Q1'2025

Correct so does this decrease the length of time or amount of algos that go to staking rewards?

This seems like a very unilateral decision. Why was there no vote to continue or discontinue governance? Where are the Algos for this period coming from? This is just a waste of resources and could be addressed independently simply by proposing a TDR grant and not requiring governance.

Distributed Oracle Agreement Standard (DORAs)

ARC Author: Jacopo Mileto + CODELAB Hello everyone! I’m writing here to gather support for a new standard before going through the official ARC repo and start the proposal. The main reference for this standard implementation is the work done by Supra …

I’m in favor of removing all allocations to USDt-related pools and reallocating to USDC-paired pools. With the announcement of Coinbase support for USDC transfers, I think it’d be great to further incentivize and an opportunity to advertise to the larger crypto community opportunities to invest the…

Gauging community thoughts on removing all or a large portion of USDT TDR for GP12. With USDT no longer supported and redeem open for next 12 months you want to incentivize pools that will continue to be utilized long term. Projects this affects:

Hi Everyone,
I’m Alessandro Cappellato Ferrari, Head of Product at the Algorand Foundation. On behalf of the team behind this effort, which is comprised of @Adri @trekianov @StephaneBarroso and @Loedn, I’m happy to present the working document for the evolution of the xGov platform.

Ah of course, LP tokens are abstracted tokens for the TVL in the DEX.

This is not a plan at all. You didn’t publish any numbers and some of these vaults don’t even exist yet + not clear what the difference between a normal vault and a spread vault is? This is not a plan in my opinion.

I appreciate the intent of the proposals for the measures, but I would like to propose alternative measures that would make more of a difference. Measure #1: The legacy governance system was planned and put into place before smart contracts were widely adopted. It was designed to keep the whales from making all the decisions.

From what I’ve read here, my understanding is that the more successful the proposal is, the bigger the security drop. So even if this proposal works great, it creates an equally great problem because the stake will dump at a known time.

I would like to see FAIR consensus incentivization. Not just online escrow accounts from folks, but also other online accounts, and also public participation nodes.

Measure 6 is a conflict of interest. That alone should disqualify it.

Happy to see that there are technical implementation details shared for discussion! Regarding the new measures, I have several concerns: The Foundation is already incentivising DeFi participation with the Aeneas rewards program, why do we need to allocate additional rewards from the governance proposals?

This is definitely a transparency problem. If this much time is being spent on any decision, there is absolutely no reason why these topics should not be brought up and discussed with the community as a whole.