TFL Community Grant
- TFL will not post a proposal to lock the community pool. That should be a community led effort
- TFL will create a community council to direct its stake
- Community pool vesting smart contract audit is here
- LUNA has more sell pressure than necessary, making it hard for the community to gain momentum
- The community/ecosystem is in a constant state of conflict
- Terra builders need some support through the bear market. They need to find their own path to product-market-fit (PMF), but we should acknowledge that due to UST’s fallout, they face unique challenges they wouldn’t encounter in other ecosystems
- Those builders who stick around and build useful products (as measured by user retention and engagement) should participate in Terra’s success
- We need to invest aggressively to build useful/fun products for our community and outcompete our competition
- If we try to fund all of this through the Community Pool, we will not be successful
- TFL to negotiate and pay for community tools/projects using its non-LUNA treasury, ensuring accountability within an enforceable legal framework. We will conduct due diligence on the project’s potential value-add to the ecosystem and its ability to execute. This will relieve a significant burden on the community.
- TFL to provide Foundation (best-in-class, high-performance infra/indexers/relayers) to all credible builders on Terra. Existing Cosmos infrastructure is expensive and lacks scalability. Indexers are a hassle. We've taken everything we learned running Terra at scale and turned it into a free product for our ecosystem. This significantly reduces protocol operating expenses and gives our ecosystem some help and support while they find PMF.
- Rate limiting and reasonableness apply; TFL reserves the right to deny service
- TFL to provide LUNA incentives to teams that drive fees and user engagement within Terra. These incentives will vest based on time and total LUNA market cap, avoiding short to medium-term price issues while giving founders skin in the game and upside exposure when we all succeed.
- TFL to provide high-quality collateral to the Terra ecosystem and partners to solve the cold start problem. We can bring in tokens like BTC, ETH, stablecoins, and others, matching LUNA from the Community Pool to provide liquidity on Terra or other chains, or simply deploy the collateral on its own. With the help of the Terra community, this collateral will be allocated to opportunities that maximize transaction volume, capital velocity, user retention, and economic activity.
- Implement Fee Share Module (separate proposal): TFL to match 50% of fees generated by Terra applications with stablecoins until Jan. 2025, enabling ecosystem teams to earn 75% of the fees they generate on-chain. There is nothing more value aligning than this. We need to focus on usage, engagement, and retention – capital, network effects, and brand equity will follow.
- Lock the remainder of the Terra Community Pool until Jan. 2025 (separate proposal) and then revisit it as a community. TFL can develop this over one week and post a subsequent governance proposal to upgrade the chain, implementing the change.
- Community Tools / Project - Accountability missing is the biggest issue with CP grants, so definately in favor of putting some accountability in.
- Foundation - Ideally to allow decentralized GUIs, as backend systems are the most difficult to decentralize, if your app is depending on them.
- Users - Bringing in users with projects like Growth DAO is essential for the success
- Liquidity - Liquidity without mercenary capital extracting the value of tokens will make it sustainable for projects to grow naturally.
- Fee Share Module - Not so sure about this one. The matching part is a good idea, but it might incentivize the wrong thing. Inefficient contracts and higher / unoptimized gas fees
- Lock - As in your update should be community led process
- L1 foundation - Needed to attract teams and run the chain as a business that wants to be profitable.
some nice chat bot writing lol
- Locking Community Funds: I'm coming around to your perspective on the community funds lock proposal. We added that in because of community feedback. But some have raised a valid point that if the only way to get funding in TFL, then people don't have anywhere to go go if TFL can't make a deal.
- Conclusion: TFL should pull that out of this proposal, and that locking the community pool should be a community driven proposal. We won't put locking the community pool up for vote that should be a community driven effort if they want it.
- Selective Staking: MB raised this as well and I told him I needed to think about it. He asked if a community committee could determine where we stake.
- Conclusion: Both of you are correct. TFL shouldn't wield this much influence with their stake. We wanted to be sure we can direct stake to value add services, but the community is capable of doing that. We create a community committee to direct the delegation of our stake.
- Grant Concerns:
- This is a unique type of grant, one we haven't seen before. We are proposing to inject SIGNIFICANT amounts of capital today, in exchange for money in the future. The amount we want to contribute in the next 2 years is much more than the present value of a 100M LUNA grant over the course of 5 years. So this isn't a handout, its a swap and a swap that is by any means of traditional valuation is extremally positive value for the ecosystem and community. It even much more than the current value of the tokens that are going to vest over the next 5 years. I can't make that investment without being sure that TFL has a treasury to fund operations once that money is gone. Its the right thing to do by TFL and the right thing to do by the Terra community that wants TFL to play a leading role in driving adoption of the blockchain for decades into the future.
- We will definitely be transparent about the teams and projects we fund. Purely out of self interest, it makes sense to do so. But we won't share the terms of those deals, for both legal and practical purposes.
- We believe that if Terra is going to succeed it needs a massive injection of non-LUNA capital immediately to support the ecosystem. Both in terms of liquidity, developer support, and tooling. If we try to fund that out of the community pool, LUNA will fail and the Terra community will continue to fall apart. The status quo is not viable, the current trend is unsustainable and TFL is capable of reversing the tide. If there is another organization willing to spend tens of millions of non-luna treasury today in exchange for the same amount of luna tokens 1-5 years from now, I would beg you to take the deal.
Great to see some true leadership taking place in Terra! Unfortunately, it is not the norm on Cosmos SDK chains.
We’d be interested in participate in the discussion for establishing the criteria used by the delegation committee, but at least my user is not able to post in the Discord channel for the committee (https://discord.com/channels/983359798059892766/1179000806423408640)
Additionally, as much as I’ve only have positive things to say about the PFC_Validator crew both on a personal and a professional level, it’s interesting decision having a validator be part of the committee…
We think this has good potential to incentivise other builders than TFL to support rebuilding the Terra blockchain.
We would like to suggest:
- please make a maximal effort to add precision wherever possible, such as (pessimistic/expected/optimistic) timelines/milestones, goals (ranges) for allocations, the type of projects supported, etc, to enable some accountability.
- clarify legal risks, if known, from centralization: expectation of profit, running investigations. Why do other projects use ownerless foundations as the legal structure?
- what is meant by (gas?) fee sharing
Please visit wager.money (desktop) for the current prediction of this proposal passing. Connect to testnet to participate in the market.