Option 3 looks as best one. BUT, I would stick to Option 1, as original terms. AND I would suggest to slightly redevelope your proposal and introduce it as a major rule for future contest payouts. And provided there general rules for say vesting and non-vesting schemes, so that contest originators could simply refer to those terms, specifiyng ony the size of payouts
For me conditions was clear
Winner 1: 150k,
winner N: xxxx
Winners receive not more then 30k after content finished
All remaining amount (150k-30k = 120k for winner 1) will be distributed within six months in equal parts
So up to 30k now, remainings in equal part in 6 month
This both option 2 and option 3.
I voting to option 3
Right, but the point is option 1 IS NOT in the original terms. The original terms are ambiguous due to the line “no more than” which implies it can be less than. There was confusion about this. That’s the reason for this proposal, to make it clear. Personally I don’t care which option is chosen. It’s up to all of you folks. Just let’s hurry so the proposal can be voted on and the tokens sent out.
Hello everyone! our understanding of awards in the competition aligns with options 1
At the moment we have a tie. 4 for option 1 and 4 for option 3
Come on. Someone please tiebreak this thing and let’s get it voted on and done and paid out
I agree with @bpimonenko , Option 1 should apply. This option is the closest to Contest Specs
That makes it 5 for option 1 and 4 for option 2.
Suggesting a deadline is 10:00 AM UTC, 12:00 noon CET, 13:00 Moscow time on Wednesday, June 16, 2021 for final. We need to get this finalized. Will draft a quick proposal thereafter and off we go.
Option 1! It is right!
Payout Schedule Amendment to Contest #142 - NFT Marketplace
Under the Rewards section in the “Prize Payout & Vesting” subsection, the language in the original NFT Marketplace contest provided some ambiguity as to how rewards are to be distributed.
You will notice that the language isn’t clear about how much is up front and how much should be vested. The description says that the first reward should be “no more than” 30K with the balance vested over 6 months. No more than implies, by virtue, that it can be less than.
There are only 5 possible winners with rewards as follows:
Winner 1: 150K
Winner 2: 120K
Winner 3: 100K
Winner 4: 30K
Winner 5: 30K
This created a division with 2 schools of thought where one side felt that only the first 3 of 5 winners would have 6 months of vesting and everyone would get 30K initially, leaving winners 4 and 5 unvested and prize payouts as final. The other side felt that all 5 winners should be vested, in which case there needed to be an arithmetical solution to describe how vesting would work in that case.
A consensus poll with 3 possible options was drafted and placed in the forum thread. Interested parties came and left their opinions on which option is best. With a final tally of 6 to 4 option 1 prevailed. As a result, token rewards for winners will have the following structure:
- All 5 winners receive 30K initially
- Winners 1, 2 and 3 will have the balance of their tokens vested over the course of 6 months
- Winners 4 and 5 are excused from vesting
This contest will be for which subgob?
Hi all, here is a short execution report of NiFi Club marketplace, in line with contest requirements:
- we are currently in active stage of preparation for delivery in production - ie in mainnet. To facilitate this, we completely reworked the whole infrastructure of the project
- set up dev/staging/production environments, with dedicated domains (nifi.club vs dev.nifi.club), repositories structure, servers and databases
- made 3 integrations with external services
- prepared administrative workplaces (for moderator etc)
- prepared the site for localization
- completely redeveloped UX offering search, filters, personal accounts etc
- we have developed new type of token, and extensively testing developments and particularly UX in respect to multiple types of tokens on the platform. We moved our repository from Gihub to Gitlab because we needed to arrange access for Crimea-based developer, while Github denies access for them. Link to REPLICA of our repository
We need to say that it is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT to make any developments and respective testing when Testnet is regularly down for quite a while. It was down from 10/07 until 15/07, and again it’s down from 19th, and there is no clue when it will be operational again. It’s a real pain
- We have reached a number of partnership agreements on development and issue of specialised tokens (gaming etc). Specifically, we have agreed pilot launch of NFT tickets for a business club events. As many of you probably remember, NiFi Club served (without any compensation) NFT tickets for 1st Free TON anniversary event.
- it would be of much help if ANY reporting requests/requirements were delivered in advance. There is no problem with either providing access to code, or any relevant materials, but it takes time while the team has limited adminitrative resource
- establish real-time monitoring of testnet performance and introduce some reasonably safe policy of its maintenance. It is CRITICAL to have testnet operational
Submission 11 ( place 5 )
We are doing rebranding
We are changing smart contract for TNFT support
Release to prod in august
So, about the current state of the project grandbazar.io (Submission 13)
We are at the stage of testing; launch is planned from Aug. 1st to Aug. 7th.
- Smart contracts are rewritten to fit True NFT architecture. The content is not yet loaded into the blockchain, we plan to store it in our S3.
There is the overall scheme of our contracts – and how users interact with them: Grandbazar_schems.pdf - Google Drive
Repository with new contracts: GitHub - grandbazar-io/True-NFT
Now it is the testing stage for smart contracts. Unfortunately, unstable performance of the testing network gives a lot of headache sometimes. We deployed tonos on the server which is accessible for the entire team. But some cases (like operations with browser extensions) simply cannot be tested on this server.
Our application’s Back End was completely rewritten, made faster and more scalable. Currently we are adding web sockets’ support and subscription on the events in the blockchain.
Front End design was refactored: adapted for devices with smaller screens. New methods of user authorization were added. In progress: adding user notifications, support of other wallets and browser extensions.
- Content plan for help-center
- Media plan for digital traffic acquisition
- Media plan for SMM
- Creatives for digital traffic acquisition
- SEO-strategy and action plan for CIS-region
- UI/UX improvements https://www.figma.com/proto/sjqfgkElbYHUugIX1rOnRN/Grandbazar.io?page-id=44411%3A626&node-id=49407%3A1404&viewport=1954%2C468%2C0.3874780237674713&scaling=scale-down
- Arranged collaboration with 10+ artists
- White label design scheme
- Team has been strengthened with SMM-manager, Support Engineer, QA tester, middle designer
And the cherry on top: at launch NFT from Mr.Freeman will be the flagmanship collection!!!
Hi everybody, here is a execution report of Tonium marketplace, in line with contest requirements:
Our team has made significant progress in the development of our NFT-marketplace.
As you can remember and see from the judges’ ratings, the main disadvantage of our solution was the lack of UI. Smart contracts were 100% ready, and the design was just presented in Figma.
We are glad to inform you that we:
- First, we changed the design to a more attractive one.
- We did the layout of the entire design. You can see it here: https://tonium.io/collections
- We made the design in minmalistic style and made it adaptive. Now the marketplace is displayed perfectly on mobile devices.
- Previously, the marketplace worked only by interacting with Ton sdk. Now he perfectly logs in and functions through ExtraTON.
- Ton sdk now allows you to use the marketplace completely on mobile devices, without going to any wallets or DeBots (provided that your wallet, which you connected via Ton sdk, has enough assets). Everything will be done in one place, inside the web pages of the marketplace.
- Finally, the “NFT Collections” deployment started working through the UI. At this moment, the root user smart contract is created, inside which you can minted NFT.
- UI also learned minted NFT.
- We spent a lot of time teaching the UI to put the files attached to the NFT into the blockchain. At first they took a very long time to load, then we did a parallel download and trained IU to download 360Kb. Last week we taught him to upload files up to 1MB.
- Uploading to IPFS via UI now also works.
P.S. I ask you to give more time for the report than a few hours. I will update the report later.
10. Our twitter began its life https://twitter.com/TONiumNFT
There you can find our latest news and work progress. Twitter will help us to conclude new partnerships.
11. By the way, about partnership agreements. We are negotiating with the 2 largest Free TON market players about the possibility of supporting their Custodial services for NFT movement between their services and our marketplace (in\from Blockchain Smart-Contracts). Negotiations at the stage of writing the specification.