commonwealth.im
Open in
urlscan Pro
2606:4700:20::ac43:467f
Public Scan
URL:
https://commonwealth.im/
Submission: On February 25 via api from US — Scanned from DE
Submission: On February 25 via api from US — Scanned from DE
Form analysis
0 forms found in the DOMText Content
Sign in dashboard Home For You Global Chain Stargate Finance . 02/25/24 Anonymous commented on the thread ersinyildizhan hello 1 Comment Luna Classic Community Forum (LUNC) . 02/25/24 Rexyz123 created a thread Code of Practice (COP) for L1 developers. Introduction This proposal follows extensive consultation with, JL1TF, TCC, GL, StrathCole, Frag, Vinh, Igor and those working towards pegging USTC and re-enabling swaps via the market module. Passing this proposal will remove unintended barriers to getting everyone back working to deliver improvements to TerraClassic, providing a way for the community to assess the accountability of developers via a workable KYC process, while not imposing additional liabilities. 1.0 Background Proposal ‘Compulsory KYC for all L1 developers’ (12033), has resulted in intense debate, and has resulted in work on the USTC peg and reenabling the Market Module to stop. It also prevents developers within teams that are KYC’d, and volunteers from contributing. Note: Passing this proposal will supersede the requirements of 12033. Risks Currently, anybody can supply code anonymously to the TerraClassic blockchain Core or GitHub repos, posing a serious risk to the blockchain. Examples: A trojan could be inserted to compromise the chain. Deliberate harm could be inflicted to take advantage of a short position. Aims These requirements intend to provide the community with confidence that we do not have completely anonymous development teams working on the blockchain. It provides a process to give assurance if necessary that relevant details can be accessible only through the official legal channels allowing potential legal recourse to act as a deterrent for bad actors, and reduce related risks as part of a broader risk management strategy, but will not fully eradicate the risk posed by bad actors. The proposal describes a code of practice (COP) to deliver a workable KYC regime for developers delivering code to the TerraClassic Core that has high potential to cause significant impact to the blockchain. In doing so it should allow anyone to contribute to the TerraClassic Core and it defines a supervisory approach of developers that are not KYC’d by other developers that are KYC’d and prepared to be accountable for their High Potential L1 Code Work. By including a mechanism for ‘non approved contributors’ to contribute, this will facilitate access to the global pool of developer talent while also minimising costs for contributors and mitigating risks. The COP also defines process requirements which means that it can be audited by third parties without compromising data protection. 2.0 Code of Practice for ‘Approved Contributors’. 2.1 It is proposed to issue a code of practice to guide validators on the authenticity of those that ‘Work on L1 code’, and who conduct activities which are ‘High Potential L1 Code work’. 2.2 The Code of Practice defines a method for assessing and recording developers who wish to be added to governance approved lists for ‘Approved Contributors’, and ‘Approved Supplier of KYC services’. 2.3 Where there is conflict with previous approved proposals this proposal supersedes previous requirements and policy. 2.4 It is proposed that such a Code of Practice contain the following requirements: 3.0 Requirements for Developers 3.1 ‘Approved Contributors’ All developers carrying out ‘High potential L1 code work’ are: a) to be subject to a KYC process by an ‘approved supplier of KYC services’ in order to be considered as an ‘approved contributor’. b) to be included in the ‘Approved contributor list’. c) giving permission for ‘relevant personal data’ to them as described in this COP to be used for the purpose of complying with this COP. d) able to use discretion as ‘Approved Contributors’ and are entitled to reserve the right to choose who they provide supervision to. 3.2 Paid Contributors All developers wishing to be paid for L1 work are either; a) classed as ‘Approved Contributors’, or b) they belong to a team where other team members are ‘Approved Contributors’. 3.3 ‘Non Approved Contributors’ ‘Non approved contributor(s)’ who carry out work on L1 code must find an ‘approved contributor’ willing to supervise them and who will be accountable for such ‘supervised work’ produced in line with responsibilities and liabilities as defined in ‘3.4 Liability of contributors’ below. NB: Approved contributors have the right to choose who they Supervise, see ‘3.1.d’. 3.4 Liability of Contributors This Code of Practice is not concerned with defining or determining legal liability. It is however expected that all contributors (approved and non-approved) must comply with relevant requirements implied by: the Apache 2.0 licence, any relevant legal jurisdictions and professional duties of care. 4.0 Requirements for KYC Providers 4.1 Approved KYC Provider. All approved KYC providers must: a) Be approved as an ‘Approved supplier of KYC services’ by a TerraClassic governance proposal. b) Be a registered company in its local legal jurisdiction. c) Comply with data protection law in the jurisdiction they are registered in, and meet the requirements of the EU General Data Protection Regulations ((EU) 2016/679,) (ref: https://gdpr.eu/what-is-gdpr/) d) Have adequate verification processes to establish beyond all reasonable doubt the identity of individuals subject to their KYC processes. e) Have processes in place to ensure that any individual subject to their KYC process, that subsequently is the subject of litigation or legal process can be traced by legal courts and law enforcement organizations within their legal jurisdictions. 5.0 Requirements for any GitHub facilitating ‘High Potential L1 Code Work’ to the TerraClassic blockchain core. 5.1 The following requirements for administrators of a GitHub facilitating ‘High Potential L1 Code Work’ for TerraClassic Core must be followed: a) Maintain an appropriate ‘Approved KYC Supplier List’ that is readily available to the public. b) Maintain an appropriate ‘Approved Contributor List’ that is readily available to the public. c) Maintain a library for the storage of the evidence to demonstrate that an ‘Approved Contributor’ was KYC’d by the ‘Approved Supplier of KYC Services’. d) Maintain a document library containing this and any future Code of Practice that is readily available to the public. 6.0 Definitions 6.1 ‘Work on L1 code’ = Any activity involving ‘L1 code’ within a GitHub, from which that GitHub is used to update the TerraClassic blockchain, where that activity can be described as: ‘analysis’, ‘reviewing’, ‘amending’, ‘proposing new code’, ‘testing’, ‘submitting to the GitHub’, ‘accepting a pull request’, or ‘merging a L1 code pull request’. 6.2 ‘High Potential L1 code work’ = the following activities meeting the definition of ‘Work on L1 code’ that can be described as ‘submitting to the GitHub’, ‘accepting a pull request’, ‘merging a L1 pull request’. 6.3 ‘Approved Supplier of KYC services’. = An organisation that has passed a Terra Classic governance proposal as being a trusted provider of KYC services. 6.4 ‘Approved Supplier of KYC services list’ = the list of approved suppliers that have passed a Terra Classic governance proposal as being a trusted provider of KYC services. This list to be maintained and made readily available within the L1 GitHub. An appropriate _‘Approved Supplier of KYC services list’_should contain: a) the name of the supplier, b) the suppliers address, c) the suppliers email address, d) the name of a contract for the supplier, e) the date the supplier was first approved by governance, f) the date the supplier was last reviewed by governance. 6.5 ‘Approved contributor’= someone who is competent to work on the TerraClassic block chain and who appears on the ‘approved contributor list’. 6.6 ‘Approved contributor list’ = the list of ‘approved contributors’ who have been successfully KYC’d by an ‘Approved supplier of KYC services’. This list to be maintained and made readily available within the L1 GitHub. An appropriate ‘approved contributor’ list should contain: a) the name of the contributor as registered with the KYC supplier (gamer tag or GitHub tag or real name. b) the date the ‘Approved Contributor’ was KYC’d by the ‘Approved Supplier of KYC Services’. c) the ‘Approved Supplier of KYC Services’ that KYC’d the ‘Approved Contributor’. d) the date the ‘Approved Supplier of KYC Services’ confirmed that the ‘Approved Contributor’ was KYC’d with them. e) the location of the evidence to demonstrate that the ‘Approved Contributor’ was KYC’d by the ‘Approved Supplier of KYC Services’. 6.7 ‘Code of Practice’ = A document that sets the minimum standard to be adhered to in virtually all circumstances and should only be superseded or bypassed in exceptional circumstances where non adherence could introduce intolerable risk to the blockchain or users. 6.8 ‘Non Approved contributors’ = developers who carry out ‘work on L1 code’ that are not ‘Approved contributors’. 6.9 ‘Relevant Personal Data’ = As an approved contributor, the data you consent to sharing on GitHub. This includes only your screen name or gamer tag, and potentially your GitHub or other similar profiles, but does not include any sensitive personal data. This may also include a certificate of KYC, or statement in support acknowledging your KYC’d status. This is solely for the purpose of acknowledging your completion of the KYC process without disclosing personal information. … end of COP Signed by: Rexyz123 (TerraCVita) Vote “YES” if you would like this Approved Code of Practice and its requirements to be implemented. Vote “NO” if you do not want this Approved Code of Practice to be implemented. Vote “Abstain” if you are unsure, or have no opinion and want to support the majority. Vote “NO WITH VETO” if you do not value 3rd party KYC as part of a security strategy. 0 Comments Stargate Finance . 02/25/24 STGstaker23 created a thread How many STGs do you all stake on Stargate? I D... As mentioned on title, im just wondering! 0 Comments Stargate Finance . 02/25/24 STGstaker23 commented on the thread just got into STG, cant wait to learn more it will be awesome, trsut me! I also staked some STG on stargate. 3 Comments Stargate Finance . 02/25/24 STGstaker23 commented on the thread Best DeFi platform around? hmmm good question, im also wondering the same. 2 Comments Luna Classic Community Forum (LUNC) . 02/25/24 tecktorious commented on the thread LUNC's Official Code-Reviewer & Monthly Mainten... @Fragwuerdig have you thought since you dont need this as full job to make it partial …? so we can split the total amount /2 and have 2 devs as main you and another one ? 5 Comments +1 others Common . 02/25/24 Discord Bot commented on the thread Feature request: edit history log hey’d like to work on this, we have backend support for this and will try to prioritize it on the roadmap. we’ll follow up on this thread as we are able to get to it 1 Comment Stargate Finance . 02/25/24 Anonymous commented on the thread SIP#21 Improved Depeg Protection LFG 134 Comments +130 others Synonym Finance . 02/25/24 Anonymous created a thread change APY into APR currently synonym displays APY on site, compounding numbers. but most of the dapps use APR, so normal users use this number “APR” to compare with each dapps. using APY is kind of misleading guidance for normal users, not a thing for mass adoption 0 Comments Stargate Finance . 02/25/24 Anonymous commented on the thread stg Nice nice! 12 Comments +8 others Luna Classic Community Forum (LUNC) . 02/25/24 Nathalie commented on the thread Terra Classic rebranding concept designed by CH... The difference would be imo that you make a statement which can be highlighted through a campaign, change throughout CEXs etc ( if people can get behind it in the first place ) but at the same time respecting some of the history and what the community has identified with thusfar, I think a full make-over with completely different colors will not get a lot of support. Its hard to put it into words because its psychological With regards to timing, when is the right timing? My believe is that the right timing is when development props have passed. A lot of community currently have that as mainfocus and are seeking props which will bring value, others are seen as a distraction from that , in focus. Thats my evaluation after listening to some feedback in various chats 30 Comments +26 others Terra Classic . 02/25/24 LuncEtoroCommunity23 commented on the thread LUNC's Official Code-Reviewer & Monthly Mainten... Big yes. Apart from the fact that you now see him as a person because he has developed a sense of humor… Monthly salary = appropriate / yes Necessity required= Yes Representation of payment = Yes Enjoy respect and recognition = in the part of the community where I move / absolutely yes Working pace = can be defined by yourself, so you are not on a construction site here / Yes Extension of terms = Yes Publication and presentation of progress = very good and yes Since no one offers and I welcome your step forward, I basically give my yes. If a suggestion is made, this support will be enjoyed and a yes vote will be advocated. Thank you. Let’s go up ↗️ 3 Comments Stargate Finance . 02/25/24 Anonymous commented on the thread A.P.D. - mETH Request I love Meth this is a great proposal 61 Comments +57 others Terra Classic . 02/25/24 Duncan created a thread Modify BurnTaxSplit to 100/0 This is a discussion to Modify the BurnTaxSplit to 100/0. Proposal Since Proposal #5234, a percentage of all burns (manual or via taxes) has been recaptured as a source of revenue for the chain. Proceeds from this function are sent, currently, to both staking rewards (not the oracle) and the community pool, at a rate of 20% split evenly between the two (10% each). This proposal suggests to increase the burn-reward ratio to 100/0. This will not change the current tax rate; only the amount which goes to burn vs. rewards. (this includes staking rewards as well.) Reasoning The community (“DAO”) has saved nearly six months of tax revenue between the last two spend proposals. In total, the DAO has the following tax statistics: > As of Block Height #16,796,140, using historical averages: 10/17/22 - 02/15/22 > > @ LUNC = 0.0001209133093 > > @ USTC = $0.0211760256 > > 9,727,585,512 LUNC taxed ($1,176,194.56) > > 10,212,110 USTC taxed ($216,251.90) > > 5,576,282,280 LUNC spent from the Community Pool ($674,246.74) > > 1,600,000 USTC spent from the Community Pool ($33,881.64) > > 4,151,303,232 LUNC available ($501,947.82) > > 8,612,110 USTC available ($182,370.26) > > Real-time Community Pool Balance: ~$814,000 Over the course of this period, a variety of proposals around the reward split and its output (community pool funds) have emerged. This includes, but isn’t limited to, TaxPolicy/RewardPolicy (and BurnTaxSplit), as well as bureaucratic review processes like PPJ and its amendments. Notice that over half of the LUNC awarded to the Community Pool has been spent, primarily on L1 and infrastructure. The community (DAO) may find it wiser to consider their expenditures more carefully, and refrain from recapturing burn tax revenue in the meantime. Given the overall direction of the market, the Community Pool balance should appreciate similarly; there is no need to harvest excess tax revenue. This will also give time and more focus to discussions around expenditures when the DAO is not idly taxing users for gain. For example, the chain can then focus on: * keeping up-to-date documentation * quantity-of-transactions vs. size-of-transactions (L2/use cases) * seeding existing dapps on-chains (per the Community Pool’s guidelines) rather than using the CP as a proxy Treasury Code { "subspace": "treasury", "key": "BurnTaxSplit", "value": "\"0.0\"" } 0 Comments UX Chain . 02/24/24 Anonymous commented on the thread Token Incentive Program for UX Lending and Borr... > 7 Comments +3 others Stargate Finance . 02/24/24 ASHKIRO commented on the thread Anti Sybil Anti Sybil 11 Comments +7 others Vr . 02/24/24 Anonymous created a thread First thread from vr Let me post 0 Comments Luna Classic Community Forum (LUNC) . 02/24/24 Digital4rmy commented on the thread Integrity Of Validator's and KYC Please just push KYC for validators too and kill this chain once and for all 1 Comment Luna Classic Community Forum (LUNC) . 02/24/24 Digital4rmy commented on the thread Let's return the power to the LUNC holders' com... > Dumbest thing ever 1 Comment Yieldmos . 02/24/24 Anonymous commented on the thread Revenue Activation Discussion I support this! This initiative represents a significant step towards ensuring the sustainable growth and development of Yieldmos. By activating revenue streams through the implementation of take rates on Dollar Cost Averaging (DCA) and non-DCA strategies, we can secure the necessary resources to further enhance our platform and expand the ecosystem. This will enable us to continue providing valuable services to the users while fostering innovation within the space. I appreciate the transparent and inclusive approach outlined in the proposal, which emphasizes the importance of community feedback and governance in decision-making processes. This ensures that the interests of our community are prioritized and that adjustments to the take rates will be made thoughtfully and responsibly, based on market dynamics and user input. In conclusion, I believe that the implementation of take rates is essential for the long-term success of Yieldmos. I urge all members of our community to support this proposal and provide constructive feedback to help shape the future of our platform. 1 Comment Overlay Protocol . 02/24/24 Anonymous commented on the thread (OGP9) - Introduce Dual Token Governance (OVL +... Equilibrarlo muy importante 1 Comment Overlay Protocol . 02/24/24 Anonymous commented on the thread (OGP 30) - Mint the PlanckcatDAO NFT for those ... Saludos esperemos aver como sale 6 Comments +2 others Wosmo Labs 🧪 . 02/24/24 Wosmo Einstein created a thread Proposal for Commonwealth Lab Discussion: Injec... Mission: Propel $WOSMO asset liquidity into new dimensions by crafting a special concoction for the Injective community—a pool that magnetizes Injective traders. This mirrors the successful formula applied to the WOSMO/NTRN pool. Blueprint: Our experiment involves diverting 3M $WOSMO tokens from the Wosmo DAO treasury vault into the main Injective pool as a catalyst for 45 days either on Astroport or DOJOSWAP. This strategic infusion aims to supercharge liquidity and trader engagement in the Injective space. Evolution Path: Post-laboratory discussion in this Commonwealth, we’ll transition the blueprint to DAODAO for a community-wide referendum. 0 Comments Warpcast . 02/24/24 nikhd commented on the thread we are out here 🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩🎩 🎩 1 Comment Stargate Finance . 02/24/24 Anonymous commented on the thread Proposal for integrating opBNB with Stargate Be great! You have my vote 24 Comments +20 others Stargate Finance . 02/24/24 Anonymous commented on the thread Aptos Foundation and Layer Zero Proposal Aptos is one of my favorites. Good 65 Comments +61 others jpegmullets . 02/24/24 dillchen commented on the thread Best Meme ayo 3 Comments jpegmullets . 02/24/24 dillchen commented on the thread I own u, I am the largest stakeholder, I am the... check the upvotes smh 3 Comments cheqd . 02/24/24 Hriptorilla🆔 ⚛️ commented on the thread Stoking verifiable AI flames Hey guys, I think all of us are on the same page. This is my point of view and will be very short, because in essence twitter is very easy. How to build the narrative ? CONSISTENCY That should be our focus to tweet daily, you dont need to do it like me on some days I just can’t help my self and commenting like crazy to everyone. But everyday all of us should sit for hour and a half make one good quality long post , and spread few comments on the other AI projects / posts. I agree with Ghost quality posts pulls more engagement and they are crucial for success. Its much better when you have some idea lets say you find article about How Vitalik said that AI will have a huge problems, summarise what he said, try to take you point of view on that and try to explain how CHEQ can help solving that issue. I know we are missing infos about tech details how we are making AI verified but we can write what we have and people will read. If we gonna have some questions we dont know to answer tag someone from the team. I agree also that we need to have a shorter posts because the algo works in a way if we mention CHEQ 1000 times it will jump more for someone searching about CHEQ than if we mentioned CHEQ only 100 times. Thats why I on every comment allways add CHEQ tag no matter what I am writing. Also when you are commenting try to mention tag of the token + tag the page, it will lead them directly to our page. Trust me it works. Longer well explained comments are more interesting than just LFG CHEQ, but we need to have both. Dont use hashtags but only #vAI, alghoritam dont like hashtags and if you write more than one it drops you engagement significantly. Try to post about other projects on your twitter , I know we are all CHEQ Maxi and i suppose 90% of your portfolio is CHEQ (thats my case), but we need to grind people from the other communities. Thats one more tactics to get new holders. I ja moram još poraditi na tome. And last, riding posts is must + comments as well.. I think we are doing great so far but we should not stop. Activity should keep on going ! 12 Comments +8 others Dogwifhat . 02/23/24 @jpegmullet commented on the thread Vote for Dog wif ETH eth 1 Comment Dogwifhat . 02/23/24 IMR created a thread Vote for Dog wif SOL Grab some stake to vote! 0 Comments WorkoutDAO . 02/23/24 Puncar created a thread Sign up on Lumma https://lu.ma/43h56up7 I am trying to get a free ticket or discount from the gym (https://movementgyms.com/) I will make sure to keep you posted. 0 Comments Stargate Finance . 02/23/24 Anonymous commented on the thread Grow POL on Optimism by leveraging Stargate's v... yes 88 Comments +84 others diamondhandz . 02/23/24 @jpegmullet created a thread dmnd handz forever dmnd hndz 0 Comments gmgm . 02/23/24 dillchen commented on the thread GM whoever u are anon, u literally have no stake in this community. u gotta put ur money where ur mouth is if u are not for it homie 5 Comments +1 others Bonk.eth . 02/23/24 Anonymous created a thread ELI5, what is bonk? same as title 0 Comments d/acc . 02/23/24 dillchen created a thread collective sensemaking and d/acc Bumping this from the original thread > To some degree, I can be justifiably accused of shoehorning by describing some > of these info technologies as being about “defense”. After all, defense is > about helping well-meaning actors be protected from badly-intentioned actors > (or, in some cases, from nature). Some of these social technologies, however, > are about helping well-intentioned actors form consensus. > A good example of this is pol.is, which uses an algorithm similar to Community > Notes (and which predates Community Notes) to help communities identify points > of agreement between sub-tribes who otherwise disagree on a lot. > Viewpoints.xyz was inspired by pol.is, and has a similar spirit: This is where Common is currently focused. How we can make it easier for people to come in and really “make sense” of what’s happening in their community. 0 Comments Base God . 02/23/24 Nano commented on the thread The importance of memes in the blockchain ecosy... I couldn’t agree more with you! for sure memes and crypto will stay forever connected from building communities to driving adoption they are an essential part in this space 2 Comments Stargaze . 02/23/24 Anonymous created a thread [DRAFT Proposal] Create Stargaze’s Governance-C... SUMMARY This is a proposal for Stargaze to create a Polytone Proxy Account (PPA) on Neutron that is controlled by Stargaze’s governance. While there are many reasons why Stargaze might want an PPA on Neutron, an immediate reason to create the PPA now is to enable Stargaze to enter into a liquidity sharing agreement with another protocol without the need for a trusted multisig to manage the deal. Note that this proposal DOES NOT commit Stargaze to any deal with any other entity. Establishing the PPA simply removes the need for Stargaze to have to deal with this in the future, thereby reducing the deal friction between Stargaze and any other crypto-native organization that Stargaze would eventually like to partner with. PROTOCOL-TO-PROTOCOL LIQUIDITY SHARING Protocol-to-protocol liquidity sharing is becoming increasingly important, as evidenced by the Hub’s three liquidity deals (Hub props 800, 853, and 858), the liquidity deal between Osmosis and Neutron (Osmosis prop 700, Neutron prop 28), and the numerous liquidity deals struck by Shade, Sommelier, and other crypto-native organizations. However, all of the deals above require multisigs, which cause numerous issues. ISSUES WITH MULTISIGS DEAL FRICTION Recruiting the people necessary to manage the multisig adds time to the dealmaking process. This process can be a major source of friction if the two parties cannot agree on who should manage the multisig and how the multisig should govern (e.g. 2 of 4 vs 3 of 5). INCREASED LIABILITY Even if the two parties agree on who they would want on the multisig and how it should be governed, the people they want on the multisig may not want to serve on the multisig for fear of the liability or be unable to serve on the multisig for regulatory reasons. TRUST VULNERABILITIES Even if the two parties find willing and able multisig members, both parties are counting on the individuals continuing to act in good faith. An extraordinary amount of effort is dedicated toward making protocols trustless – having a trusted multisig manage an increasingly critical part of a protocol’s strategy is contradictory to the core ethos of crypto. ADMINISTRATIVE RISK Even if the individuals on the multisig continue acting in good faith, members of the multisig could lose their passphrase, have their accounts compromised by a malicious actor, or execute an incorrect message that leads to a loss of funds. OPERATIONAL OVERHEAD Even if the administration is done accurately, the administration drains the time and attention of the multisig members that could be spent on more productive activities. SLOW RESPONSE Even if the people on the multisig have nothing better to do than manage the multisig, the manual work required means that the funds managed by the multisig members cannot respond in real time to on-chain events. This precludes the introduction of automated mechanisms, which limits the possibilities for algorithmic monetary policies. Multisigs for protocol-owned liquidity (POL) are only a temporary stopgap. Covenants are the long-term solution. COVENANTS: THE LONG-TERM SOLUTION Covenants are contracts that facilitate interchain agreements. They enable multiple parties (e.g., DAOs, dApps, chains, and protocols) to enter into deals with one another without the need for an intermediary multisig. Currently, these deals can include token swaps, single-party POL (e.g., Hub prop 800), and two-party POL (e.g., (Osmosis prop 700, Neutron prop 28). MISSING PIECE: POLYTONE PROXY ACCOUNT In order for Stargaze to strike deals with other crypto-native organizations using Covenants, Stargaze must first establish a PPA on Neutron. This proposal is to establish Stargaze’s PPA on Neutron. The creation of this PPA DOES NOT commit Stargaze to any deal with any other entity. Establishing the PPA simply removes the need for Stargaze to have to deal with this in the future, thereby reducing the deal friction between Stargaze and any other DAO that Stargaze would eventually like to partner with. Stargaze only needs to create one PPA on Neutron to engage in an unlimited number of Covenants. Also, even though the PPA is on Neutron, the PPA on Neutron would enable Stargaze to engage enter into deals with any other entity that has a PPA or interchain account (ICA) on Neutron even if Neutron is not a counterparty in the deal. This level of interoperability is made possible by Covenants. POSSIBLE NEXT STEP: LIQUIDITY SHARING DEAL Once Stargaze has created its PPA on Neutron, it can use the Covenant system to enter into a liquidity sharing agreement with another blockchain. For example, let’s say that Stargaze wants to enter into a liquidity sharing agreement with Chain A that has a native token called ABCD. Stargaze could enter into an agreement with Chain A simply by agreeing on which pool both parties want to add liquidity to (e.g., the STARS<>ABCD pool on Astroport) and how much each side expects the other to contribute (e.g., 100 STARS from Stargaze and 10 ABCD from Chain A). Once both Stargaze and Chain A pass the governance proposals necessary to direct their share of the deal to the Covenant, the Covenant will initiate and provide the liquidity. CONCLUSION Let’s make it happen. WHO WE ARE: TIMEWAVE Timewave is a team dedicated to increasing the scope and scale of interoperability between internet native organizations. If you have ideas for how we can do an even better job of furthering this mission, we would love to hear from you: @TimewaveLabs. 0 Comments Beer Pong test . 02/23/24 Anonymous commented on the thread GM Beer Pongers! Paste your address anywhere fo... gm 2 Comments Terra Agora . 02/23/24 POPIAH.luna 🌖 commented on the thread ALLY Alliance Asset Proposal (Updated) Too low, 1% will be just nice… 31 Comments +27 others Farcaster . 02/23/24 nikhd created a thread Hello world Hello world 0 Comments Common . 02/23/24 @jpegmullet created a thread Community Stake is live Stake is here Exciting news everyone– we’ve just launched our community stake feature on Common! You can see the announcements here https://x.com/hicommonwealth/status/1761058375876354369?s=20 https://warpcast.com/common/0xe76d86c8 This is a pivotal moment in Common’s dedication to creating things onchain together. Excited to have you all as part of the journey - 2024 is going to be world changing! 0 Comments Bonk.eth . 02/23/24 jessmart01 commented on the thread Hello World!! Agreed, but you gotta stop upvoting your own post! 1 Comment 1inch . 02/23/24 0xjumanji created a thread 1inch Revenue Share Discussion Uniswap is revolutionizing the DeFi 1.0 landscape with their recent governance proposal on revenue sharing. I firmly believe all DeFi protocols will adapt to this new meta. Let’s make 1inch the first (second) mover. What would be required for the team to consider adding this great utility to the 1inch token? 0 Comments Bonk.eth . 02/23/24 @jpegmullet created a thread Bonk is love bonk is life Diamond Hands 0 Comments UX Chain . 02/23/24 Anonymous created a thread Increase milkTIA supply cap milkTIA has hit supply cap. Increase milkTIA cap. 0 Comments Oraichain . 02/23/24 DeonLabs commented on the thread Oraichain Developer and Project Ecosystem Growt... Thank you, HOSS, for your appreciation. Together, Orai and Deon will make the Oraichain Ecosystem the most developer and project-friendly for all the builders out there. 2 Comments qa . 02/23/24 QA commented on the thread push This is commnet 1 Comment Umami DAO . 02/23/24 folektoras commented on the thread Umami DAO Proposal #8: vUMAMI System Supportin’ 1 Comment Suggested Communities Luna Classic Community Forum (LUNC) Terra Luna Classic discussions and proposals. 28 new threads this month Terra Classic Home of the Terra Classic community on Commonwealth! 19 new threads this month Stargate Finance Omnichain native asset transfer protocol. Access the protocol’s unified liquidity pools with instant guaranteed finality. The universe is infinite with Stargate. 14 new threads this month Explore communities Introducing Community Stake Empower members with onchain ownership, gated access, and enhanced voting power with Community Stake Create community with stake Currently only newly created communities can enable stake. Learn More Please don't show this again