Are you judging a project for having its own internal token? Are you condemning a project for being successful and gaining momentum? Have you tried creating competing projects in this situation?
When you spend the nicp you no longer control them or earn apy.
If you’d like to earn apy you’d have to buy another 100 nicp
In short there is no money loop for that
Correct the dao or other holders is getting the APY, the person who invested the nicp in the project retained their liquidity.
Have you heard the expression “you cant have your cake and eat it too!” Well with this financial instrument. You can!
The nICP holder is having the cake (nachos)
The dao is eating it
There is something absurd going on here. The DAO is being condemned because it is a DAO and has its own internal economy.
2 Likes
They did not retain their liquidity. They spent it.
They will have to buy more icp to get more nicp just like if they staked in the nns.
1 Like
They retained their liquidity when they made the transaction with the dao.
The dao is getting the yield and sharing it with the holders. Im sure you understand this. IThats the whole point of the project. Again were mincing words.
1 Like
I am not trying to mince words.
You are saying if you put 100 icp into nicp then spent that nicp, you as the spender retained liquidity. which is not true.
The Forum Is Not a Stage for One-Way Noise
While everyone deserves a voice, what we’re witnessing isn’t dialogue—it’s disruption. Flooding the forum daily with off-topic arguments, strawman attacks, and noise isn’t contributing to the discussion—it’s actively derailing it.
Imagine a room with 200 people gathered to build consensus. Now imagine one person @Mico standing in the middle yelling nonsense from sunrise to sunset. No one gets to speak. No ideas move forward. No one can think straight. Even in the most radically democratic space, this would be unacceptable—not because we’re silencing anyone, but because we’re protecting everyone else’s right to participate meaningfully.
Some of us are trying to build, to understand, to critique constructively. But every thread ends up orbiting around this one troll. That’s not balance. That’s imbalance disguised as neutrality.
Forum admins might be trying to remain impartial—and we get that. But inaction here is taking a side: the side of the loudest person in the room, not the side of productive discourse.
Moderation isn’t censorship. It’s stewardship. And it’s time we start treating it that way.
4 Likes
I know you don’t like me or how I talk. I just simply point out the facts that are ignored here and engage to explain why things are incorrect. I don’t expect you to enjoy it but the reality is, I am active, I care, and I try to educate on liquid staking when there are obvious topics that are not understood.
Again if you think what I say is meaningless then don’t engage. You have the freedom to not tag me or respond to me just as I have the freedom to post and inform where I see fit.
Mico please stop derailing the topic. This is potentially a serious attack on the NNS.
1 Like
Are you nervous because your counterarguments aren’t working? They may not work because they are weak/empty in nature. I’m just now familiarizing myself with the claims of Adam and his circle… and they seem far-fetched to me. Adam is now doing to other DAOs the same thing he accuses WTN of doing. That said, WTN’s actions are quite ordinary and common in DeFi logic. There is nothing new or threatening about it.
4 Likes
Adam, I have explained to you many times that wtn has many participants. You pose a greater risk holding over 8% direct vp in the nns than an entire dao of members holding 10%.
I see you always talk about free markets and user choice to buy and sell tokens. I suggest you either buy more wtn to increase your voice, and or engage with the community and start taking the governance responsibility seriously within the dao instead of trying to kill the project.
The dao is always open to hearing opinions on votes no matter the history between people. I know I have voted with people that I have had disagreements with prior and so have many others. After all we all want ICP to succeed and grow. Liquidity is mandatory for this to happen.
It’s 6% thank you very much I have some big followers.
YOU CANNOT BUY WTN TO INCREASE YOUR VOICE.
It is gamed so that the founders always have 51%. David Fisher. Tom Serres. Coinbase investors.
2 Likes
Would you adopt a proposal to reduce canister controller power VP to 1% ?
- Yes
- No
0
voters
You had two opportunities to invest. There will be a third. Hopefully you take it seriously now.
It must be strange that there was a dao where a majority of members decided to lock instead of sell.
1 Like
Why arnt you voting on the poll mico? Id like to know where you stand.
I did invest, 20k ICP. Then I realised that the vote was rigged and I started actively fighting against Water Neuron.
Then we found out that David Fisher had paid for the node machines that Enzo and Leo were getting, and I realised what the game was.
1 Like
There is actually a possibility for a decent liquid staking solution (Nothing like WTN) that will be good for DeFi. After going through 100 bad ideas we figured one out that will result in something positive for the ecosystem an no party with ‘no skin in the game’ voting with retail funds. We will disclose it when the time comes.
What the NNS needs to take care of is the voting power of liquid staking solutions that result in someone voting with no skin in the game. That can happen possibly through reducing the voting power of 6mo-2y neurons
3 Likes
Yes, going to talk to the foundation about this.
Absolutely nuke the voting power of anything < 2 years, or something like that.
3 Likes
If u got something akin to a whitepaper id love to read it.
1 Like