The index.jsx file that you’re looking for is indeed within the landing page repo and can be found here. Although the <script defer="defer" src="index.js"></script> line will not be found within that .index.jsx file. I believe that particular script is inserted by the dfx sdk upon deploying the ui canister to the IC.
4 Likes
Hopefully, I can alleviate this concern a bit by giving more context into the factors that informed the developer allocation that was determined.
Recently, several promising projects have attempted SNS raises without success, most notably Juno Build, and Canistore. Furthermore, NFID (a well-recognized, largely-used product within the ICP ecostystem) struggled to reach its minimum ask. If not for the last minute support from some unknown investor, I believe NFID too would have failed its SNS attempt. Taking this into account, I saw it best to conduct an SNS raise that implements a strategy similar to that of OpenFPL in which the risk of a failed SNS is minimized. I also wanted to ensure that maximum participation could be achieved which mandates a low minimum_participant_icp amount. The amount I selected is 5 ICP as to create a low barrier for participation throughout the ecosystem.
A consequence of minimum_participant_icp being set to a low number is that the maximum_direct_participation_icp and the VestingSchedule.events parameter must be lowered so that the maximum number of neurons created doesn’t exceed the maximum allowed by the SNS DAO.
Lowering the VestingSchedule.events parameter was not an option since doing so resulted in an increased amount of voting power being allocated to the developer neurons. This left me with the only option being to lower the maximum_direct_participation_icp. I set maximum_direct_participation_icp to the minimum operating budget that I estimate our team would need in order to ensure we never have to conduct another fund raise in the future. This is how I arrived at the parameters that I set.
I think it is very important to emphasize that the amount of liquidity within the ICP ecosystem is very limited at this point in time. Add to that the fact that ICP is at an annual low at the moment with the potential to go even lower. To pull off a successful project, requires resources that are scarcely available right now within the ecosystem. As a consequence, this means that the $ICP raised in the launch is less likely to be leverage-able for compensating contributors of Personal DAO project and providing an operating budget for sustaining development of the project. As a result, I must rely more heavily on the $DAO token as a resource for compensating contributors to the project in order to free up the $ICP from the raise for sustaining operations.
in addition to the core team members who must be compensated with the $DAO token (2 devs, 2 business devs, 2 compliance officers, 6 people total), I anticipate having to compensate several consultants throughout our journey.
With this being the case, it saw it important that we maintain an appropriate amount of $DAO token that we use to compensate talent as needed in order to advance us through our roadmap. This is why one of the developer neurons has a shorter vesting period than the rest.
As a final note:
Personal DAO is an ambitious project that has the potential to explode real-world ICP adoption globally. There are a lot of moving parts and many years left before the work is done.
We’re currently juggling many factors and have been doing so gracefully; with very little resources at our disposal and no external funding outside of a $30,000 dev grant received from dfinity. The biggest lesson I’ve learned throughout this process is that it is paramount that we have capital at our disposal in order for us to have options. Without capital, we have no options and without options, we have no prospects. I believe $DAO token is the most valuable capital that this project will have at its disposal for compensating the talented individuals we currently have and the talented individuals that we will need in the future as we advance through our roadmap.
I chose the $DAO token allocation with this at the forefront of my mind.
I hope this has been useful in helping to convey the factors behind the initial configurations selected for this SNS.
6 Likes
Thank you for provided context and for your vote of confidence.
One of my plans for the Personal DAO SNS’s 8-year neuron is to use it to provide a regular budget for paying devs to review NNS and SNS proposals with the the level of detail that @timk11 displayed. With this, the NNS becomes a bit more decentralized.
7 Likes
I read through a large part of the whitepaper and found it to be intriguing. I love how theory-heavy this project is, and I hope it can succeed - but not as an SNS. I don’t think that’s what it is, and it feels like an abuse of the SNS framework to me (but maybe I’m just no being creative enough).
An SNS consists of an open, permissionless governance system governing a dapp, and of a built-in governance token that is unique to each SNS.
Service Nervous System | Internet Computer
There is no dapp under the SNS’s control (other than a basic static asset canister), and there is therefore no dapp governance token - as far as I see it.
I mean no offense, and it seems numerous other people have raised this same point, but this doesn’t seem like it should be considered a valid SNS. The purpose seems to be about raising capital, in return for no control over anything meaningful other than that capital (portions of which will be syphoned off to support a dev team in building something that the investors have no ownership of).
This seems like the antithesis of what an SNS is meant to be. It’s an obvious reject for me, which is how I’ve voted, but that doesn’t mean I don’t respect the vision for this project.
2 Likes
Have you taken the time to read through the tokenomics by chance? Based on your comments, I worry you may have casted your vote prematurely, before understanding the role that the SNS plays in the Personal DAO ecosystem.
The Personal $DAO SNS goes beyond simply raising capital for the development of the protocol. If the purpose of the SNS were only to raise capital, i wouldn’t have selected a larger allocation for the development. Instead, 70% of the capital raised is to remain within the Personal DAO treasury, with the biggest allotment going within an 8-year neuron that too will be controlled by the SNS DAO. The rewards from the 8-year neuron are dispersed to the $DAO token holders- making $DAO token a liquid staking alternative to $nICP that features its own unique tokenomics.
$DAO token differs from $nICP in that the $ICP rewards that each $DAO token earns varies depending on the monetary policy that the SNS DAO sets. This is all spelled out in the tokenomics document. In addition to it being spelled out there, the concept of the Personal DAO SNS acting as a decentralized central bank for the Personal DAO ecosystem was explains earlier In this very thread.
This use of an SNS isn’t all that foreign considering Water Neuron has already established a precedent for liquid staking. I’m curious to know if you also voted to reject the water neuron SNS, or did you vote in favor of it?
I don’t mean this as any sort of attack, but I worry your vote may have been formed under the influence of groupthink after skimming this thread or reading a summary of this thread that was synthesized using the “ask ai” feature, rather than you independently exploring the the project and arriving at a well-informed decision. Pardon me if I am wrong.
On another note, I think it’s important to caution the community against blindly adhering to the precedents of the past at the risk of innovation. I’m sure the quote you referenced regarding the SNS’s Use-case wasn’t placed there by Dfinity so that the community could maintain an unyielding adherence to it.
As a builder myself, I’m always looking forward to seeing how people use the technology that I’ve built in ways that I never considered. That’s part of what makes building most fulfilling and what allows for spontaneous order to arise within ecosystems. I’m sure Dfinity’s intentions behind the creation of the SNS shares this same spirit.
In response to this, I’ve addressed this concern in detail each time it was raised. And each time I addressed this concern, I’ve provided a unique justification.
Each person who raised the concern was unable to make a case against the validity of this SNS. Their arguments went no further than yours does which is essentially: “it’s not like how the previous SNSs have been conducted, therefore I don’t approve”.
This leaves me with concerns of my own. Namely, that the main reason you all have an aversion to this SNS is because it differs from the SNS use cases that you all have grown accustomed to and therefore, it has been deemed unworthy of the same opportunity for funding that so many other SNS projects have been afforded.
I want to caution all who share this concern against allowing yourselves to become rigid in your thinking. There are good ideas for how the SNS can be used that go beyond those that have been presented thus far. That is what it means to innovate. And innovation is exactly what is being achieve with Personal DAO.
I cannot fault you all for failing to see the vision… Not everyone does upon first hearing it. But I do hope that you all will do me the favor of not curtailing my ability to implement the vision that has survived scrutiny administered by forces more powerful than I care to detail in this thread
7 Likes
Hey Jesse,
I always put great effort into my votes. I don’t vote manually without doing this, unless the proposal in question has already executed (in which case my vote cannot influence the outcome). I also aim to not take anyone’s word for anything when I vote, and I always endeavour to fact check anything that my vote depends on.
Yes, of course I read this in the tokenomics part of your whitepaper 
I don’t see your summary as deviating from mine at all.
After the dev team have taken their significant share of the ICP raised, I understood that ICP raised would be allocated to an 8yr neuron stake - something which investors could do themselves directly, without a large portion of those funds being directed away from them. Entertaining the idea though:
- Who/what controls the neuron? Who does the neuron follow?
- How are the rewards disbursed? Who/what does that? The static asset canister?
This is a strawman argument. As far as I see it, based on my understanding of both projects, Personal DAO is not comparable to WaterNeuron in a meaningful or substantial way.
This is not what I’m doing. Are you familiar with why the SNS framework was set up, and the problem that it’s intended (and expected) to solve? Many prospective SNSs have been rejected simply for having >50% VP afforded to the founding team. This case is even worse as far as dapp governance goes, in that the novel or unique components that would normally be protected by the SNS framework, simply aren’t, at all.
These questions confirm my suspicion that you have not read the tokenomics paper, contrary to what you’ve said.
Regarding your question about who the neuron will follow, this was touched on Earlier in this thread, although, to be fair, it was not mentioned explicitly as the answer to your question.
The rest of your questions on the other hand have been explicitly answered (and underlined) on the first page of the tokenomics documentation.
Below is a screenshot from the tokenomics paper which answers your questions regarding who/what controls the neuron, and how the rewards are disbursed.
3 Likes
Again, I’ve addressed these concerns repeatedly throughout this thread.
I’d like to suggest you take the time to read through them carefully, and then let me know what your thoughts are after doing so. We can discuss again after I’ve had some time to rest. I’ve been responding to comments around this proposal since early this morning.
I assure you, whatever remaining concerns you hold have probably already been raised and addressed prior to this point in the discussion.
3 Likes
I’m one of the 62 OG Personal DAO members and a voting member of synapse and I’ve voted to adopt Proposal 135584. Here’s why I support it:
-
I Trust Jesse: I’ve known Jesse for over three years in the ICP ecosystem. He’s been grinding on this with almost no resources, and I trust him to keep building something solid.
-
Personal DAO Works for Me: I use it, it’s useful, and it’s innovative—letting me run my own DAO easily. It’s got real value for users like me and could boost ICP adoption.
-
SNS as Funding: I see the SNS as a tool to fund good projects, not just hand over finished dapps. Although it was designed to be that way, but no projects have used it in that manner. Personal DAO deserves that shot—investors can decide if it’s worth their ICP. No gatekeeping unless it’s a scam, and this isn’t.
I get the critiques about control and transparency, but as a user, I see the bigger picture: a working product with potential. Jesse’s got my vote to keep it rolling.
8 Likes
Hi @Jesse . Thank you for your detailed and thoughtful responses to my review.
One thing I’m still a bit uncertain about is index.js vs index.jsx, as to whether these are in fact quite separate things. I’d be grateful if someone could help to clarify this.
1 Like
Somarlar perfectly sums up my thoughts as well. I’m voting Yes and firmly believe that Personal DAO deserves an SNS launch.
6 Likes
My sentiment EXACTLY → given how difficult it often is for legitimate projects on IC to obtain grant based funding these days, coupled with the clearly outlined incentives for holding the $DAO token… I say let the people vote with their choice to invest. I know also Trust Jesse and vouch for the legitimacy of Personal DAO.
6 Likes
Hi everyone,
I’m Dexter, one of the 62 OG Personal DAO members, and an avid supporter of Proposal 135584, which I’ve proudly voted to adopt. As someone deeply involved in this project—from its early days as an NFT holder to my current role as an ambassador—I want to share why I believe Personal DAO and Jesse deserve this shot through the SNS launch. Here’s my take:
Trust in Jesse: A Proven Leader
I’ve known Jesse for over three years within the Internet Computer (ICP) ecosystem, and his dedication to Personal DAO is nothing short of inspiring. He’s been grinding away on this project with minimal resources, consistently showing up and pushing forward. Having spoken to him on multiple occasions—not just about Personal DAO but about the broader vision for ICP—I can say with confidence that he’s the real deal. Over the past few months, I’ve had the chance to witness his work ethic up close, and it’s impressive. His networking skills are top-notch, and his communication abilities—on full display in this forum and beyond—mark him as a true leader. I trust him to keep building something valuable, and that trust is a big reason I’m backing this proposal.
Personal DAO Works for Me: Real Utility, Real Potential
As an OG NFT holder, I’ve been involved with Personal DAO since its early development and testing phases. I use it myself, and I can vouch for its utility—it’s an innovative tool that makes running my own DAO simple and effective. For me, and I suspect for many others, it delivers real value. Beyond personal use, I see its potential to drive ICP adoption by offering a practical, user-friendly solution. After seeing its impact firsthand, I decided to join the Personal DAO team as an ambassador to spread the word and get more people excited about what it can do. This isn’t just a concept—it’s a working product with room to grow.
SNS as Funding: A Chance for Good Projects
I view the Service Nervous System (SNS) as a mechanism to fund promising projects, not just to hand over fully polished dapps to the community. While the SNS was designed with this flexibility in mind, few projects have leveraged it this way—until now. Personal DAO deserves that opportunity. Let investors decide if it’s worth their ICP; that’s the beauty of decentralized governance. I’m not here for gatekeeping—unless a project’s a scam (and this isn’t), it should get its shot. Compare this to projects like Cycle Station, which abandoned its promises, or others that used the SNS to extract value without delivering. Jesse’s track record stands in stark contrast—he’s shown unwavering commitment to building something meaningful.
The Bigger Picture: Bridging Web3 and Beyond
I’m aware of the critiques about control and transparency floating around, and I get where they’re coming from. But as a user and believer in this project, I see the bigger picture: Personal DAO is a functional product with massive potential. It’s not just for the ICP ecosystem—it could serve as a bridge for non-Web3 users to enter the space effortlessly. Beyond that, it opens doors to entirely new markets. Take Solana meme coin communities, for example—they could use Personal DAO to manage their treasuries in a decentralized way. With the Solana RPC canister coming online soon, this vision aligns with what Kyle and the DFINITY team have emphasized: targeting where the big money flows. My role as an ambassador will focus on bringing those Solana meme communities over to adopt Personal DAO as their community DAO, tapping into a vibrant and lucrative niche.
My Vote and My Belief
Jesse has my vote—not just for Proposal 135584, but for the vision he’s chasing with Personal DAO. His dedication, leadership, and the tangible potential of this project make it a no-brainer for me. This isn’t about blind faith; it’s about backing a team and a product that have already proven their worth and are poised to do even more with the right support. I’ve voted to adopt Proposal 135584, and I urge others in the community to consider doing the same. Let’s give Personal
Thanks for reading—happy to discuss this further!
@dehypokriet on X
4 Likes
I’m sorry, but it doesn’t, and I did.
No it wasn’t, not even in the post you just linked to. I’ve searched again and couldn’t find anything of the sort. Please point me directly to it if it exists (if so I must be blind).
They have not, or I wouldnt’t have asked.
An SNS DAO has control over its treasury, and dapp canisters. There is no neuron being placed under the DAOs control, and there is no code for doing this that is being placed under the DAOs control either. There’s also no code for disbursing that ICP and then detecting who to transfer the disbursed maturity to. If this code exists, it is not being decentralised.
Let me be a little more precise with my questions:
- Who is/will the controlling principal(s) for the neuron be (in terms of controller, any hotkeys, any Manage Neuron followees)
- Which neuron(s) will that neuron be following on which topics? Who makes that decision, and how is it enforced/actioned?
- Where is your infrastructure for doing all of this, and why is it not being placed under the DAOs control?
Others who have posted in support of this project have missed the point in my opinion. I don’t think this is about how useful Personal DAO is. The issue is that this SNS is not handing Personal DAO over to any investors. Its a decentralisation sale that decentralises nothing, other than joint control over the funds that people contribute (after a portion has been taken to fund the dev team in building something they’re not prepared to share ownership of).
This really is the antithesis of an SNS. I think it needs resubmitting, and actually decentralise the Personal DAO dapp canisters this time.
.jsx indicates a JavaScript file that contains HTML elements. ..jsx files compile to .js which would explain the difference in the file types.
2 Likes
@bitel911, @DAGroupHQ, @Ajki, @Sormarler,
I appreciate your votes of confidence in the project. If the same scrutiny applied to this particular SNS launch was applied to the rest of them, I’m sure the SNSs that ended up being rug pulls would never have happened.
Some of the concerns raised by skeptics were valid, and addressed, but some of the criticisms expressed here today were the result of bandwagon skepticism from people who haven’t even taken the time to read through the documents before casting votes to reject the proposals.
It means a lot for you all to vouch for the validity of this project. I’m looking forward to proving the supporters right and proving the skeptics wrong.
3 Likes
It feels a bit surprising that @Jesse had to answer once again the question about .jsx vs. .js.
So, just to clarify — this is simply how web development works.
The landing page is built using the React framework, which relies on JSX markup. A JSX file is compiled and transformed into a JS file before being consumed on the web. Many SNS projects already use this framework.
It’s also worth noting that you can build the project yourself. While I agree that having clear build instructions documented in a README would be helpful, I have to say that, in my opinion, many SNS projects have weak GitHub presentation and documentation as well. So, while I see this personally as a bad practice (no offense), I don’t see it as a major issue here either.
For those curious, you can build the website using the following command:
git clone https://github.com/JessAYrn/Landing-Page/
cd Landing-Page
npm ci
# in two separate terminals
dfx start
dfx deploy
# cancel dfx start and deploy
# continue
npm run build
# results
ls -ltr dist/landing_page/index.js
# -rw-r--r-- 1 you staff 4408835 2 mar 12:20 dist/landing_page/index.js
cat dist/landing_page/index.html | grep defer
# <script defer src="index.js"></script></head>
4 Likes
Hopefully my clarified questions can get an answer 
Thanks
1 Like
Update: This concern has been addressed and the OP has been updated. Thank you @bitel911
Original: I can’t speak for most of this information, but you are not a voting member of Synapse. Why would you make this claim when there are multiple people participating in this forum thread who can verify this is false?
2 Likes
My bad, I interpreted this wrong, Thought we where referring to the DAO voting in the OG NFT’s, i will adjust my post. Misunderstood it, thank you for the correction.
2 Likes