Proposal: Freeze the distribution of tokens from Givers and recommend the SG to reduce spending

The SG model has become the embodiment of self-organization and decentralized work across sectors. This model was the pride of Free TON. Of course, the SG’s work was not perfect, we learn from our mistakes. But we do it ourselves. Otherwise, the project will become centralized. What we really need is to develop an ecosystem of dApps so that the expenses of community members remain inside the ecosystem. The fact that many millions of tokens have splashed out on the market is not from SGs. It was from part of previous initials and from thoughtless marketing. Why are you touch the SG model. We are a decentralized community. Or not anymore ?

Модель сабов стала воплощением самоорганизации и децентрализованной работы по секторам. Эта модель была гордостью Free TON. Конечно, работа сабов не идеальна, мы учимся на своих ошибках. Но зато мы делаем это сами. Иначе проект станет централизованным. То что нам действительно нужно - это развивать экосистему децентрализованных приложений чтобы траты участников комьюнити оставались внутри экосистемы. То что многие миллионы токенов выплеснулись на рынок - это же не от сабов. Это от части предыдущих инишиалов и от необдуманного маркетинга. Зачем вы трогаете модель сабов. Мы же децентрализованное комьюнити. Или уже нет ?


Отличная идея!

Поставил ордер на 0.1 :gem:


хыхыхы , ору с дивана

This is a very strange idea to deprive the community of token motivation and hope that people will be motivated only by faith in the project.

The best solution would be to create a system of [decentralized] control and feedback to restrict (or prevent) the distribution of tokens to those SGs that spend tokens inefficiently.

You also wrote:

As everyone remembers, the original idea of ​​ex. Free TON was a gradual distribution of token emissions among the community in exchange for adding value to the project. It is strange to demand self-sustaining from existing teams if such a goal was never set for them. At what point did someone wait and demand self-sustaining from teams? Now? Hmm.

I do not support this proposal, but I think that the voices against will not be heard.


You can reduce it, but you do not need to completely suspend the distribution of tokens for events that occur in Everscale. I am against canceling this distribution. What then do the community look at, which is distributing tokens when they were recruiting staff, to implement their ideas. The project should develop further. I am not a full-fledged member of the community, but I would soon like to become one by paying with the same crystals, if possible. When there was a set, I simply did not pass it. Today I’m waiting for the competition, at the Everscale Academy, to take part in it.

1 Like

Да очень коротко и вместе с тем емко…

I am totally against this proposal and others like it. In order to make some kind of regulation, you need to at least understand this, unfortunately you can quickly destroy the system that has been created for more than a year, but it will not work to restore it. Here and so the state is on the verge, with rebranding, the exit of the Korean community, the lack of advertising from Defi Alliance, listing and everything else. Capitalization falls catastrophically, if you remove the contests, the rate drops to zero and nothing will raise it later.


I will also add that Wiki SG paid contestants of the #36 Wiki Renewal Contest (ended in September 2021) only a fraction of the tokens due, because they were depleted at that moment.

The outstanding amount is 39,282.00 EVERs.
I think it’s fair to at least support this and distribute the Wiki SG with these tokens so that we can pay off and end these outstanding commitments to the authors and the Wiki community.

I repeat that this Wiki SG debt to the community arose in September 2021, long before current events. Therefore, an exception can be made for this distribution of tokens.


I agree with you! I support this initiative and think that it would be quite fair to appreciate the work of the participants (distributing the rest of the tokens owed among them), who spent their efforts and created quality content.


I support this idea, since the renovation of the wiki is in progress, and the authors should not suffer in this matter.

it would be nice to make this a another proposal!


Of course, some already done works have to be rewarded.
It’s not a huge amount, an effort could be done by our community, meritocratic blockchain.


I express great support to the wiki contributors that they have agreed to this and are patiently waiting.


The work must be rewarded!


I support this proposal because honest work has to be rewarded :))

1 Like

I propose the above problem statement be given proper solutions. The statements are great but the proposed solutions are not really the exact ones.

Very insane proposal. It is easier to destroy than to build this is what this proposal will do to everscale if not follow the path of caution.