The DIP20 canister, presale canister and node reward canister had been handed over to SNS that EMC created at the first attempting of decentralizing. We did not get the control back after the decentralizing failed because the canisters be inadvertently handed over to sns_governance which should be sns_root. Although EMC lost control of these 3 canisters, but they are working properly for now.
If the second attempt of SNS succeed, we will deploy new canisters based on the official ICRC-1 Token. And stake holders of EMC should vote on proposals on registering new canisters, deposit EMC(ICRC-1) to new NodeReward canister, and canister upgrading etc. I thinks that’s “EMC managed by DAO based on SNS” means.
At least 2 sets of canisters will be introduced: NodeReward canister(s) with official ICRC-1 token and canister(s) for EMC(DIP20) swapping to EMC(ICRC-1).
The reward system indeed is complex and some adjustments have to be done after SNS:
-switch from DIP20 to ICRC-1
-EMC node participants been required to stake EMC(DIP20) before and they will be required to hold enough EMC(nueron) after.
-switch reward plan from Testing to Production
I believe the EMC Foundation team has the plan of providing grants for reviewing, auditing and contributing on the EMC protocol further development. But as far as I know EMC(ICRC-1) is preferred than EMC(DIP20) for the grants.
SNS yaml file will be disclosed by EMC account with tokenomic sheet and necessary explanations SOON.
@cyberowl Thanks for your question and interesting in EMC.
@zed.emc I know you guys are upset, but I genuinely want you guys to try again after 6 months with new roadmap and huge progress. I wish you all the very best. Failures are stepping stones. Please learn from it and make progress. Good luck.
Although we’ve had some rather heated verbal confrontations before, thank you for your kindness, we are happy to accept defeat, it shows that the community is not yet recognized for EMC, Dfinity has a Global R&D product demo scheduled for EMC tomorrow, I hope you’ll be able to make it.
@Aqq I have removed some of your comments which were flagged my multiple users. Calling something “failure” again and again across multiple messages is closer to spam than it is to the kind of reasoned arguments we want in this developer forum.
Also please consider…
multi strike suspension that escalates quickly to a ban
delete comments that are off topic, inappropriate, and spam
throttle comments using a timer
There are people frustrated with forum moderation who will continue doing this until something changes. These posts are just like the spam Governance proposals last year. There was a valid agenda that the NNS was broken and a nerve was pushed until Dfinity and the community finally gave in and made a change. Please let’s make a change to forum moderation and enforce clear rules that limit the impact of people who want to destroy conversations. It’s not possible to make everyone happy, so let’s not try. It is appropriate for Dfinity to moderate the forum or hire people to do it as 3rd party contractors. Please just implement policies that make it clear to most people that it’s a civilized environment where intellectually honest conversation can occur and technical support and community assistance can be provided.
I have removed many many comments from the user spamming
I have sent them a warning and silenced their account for 3 months. I stopped short of permanent removal only because I am hav even trying to formalize some process of escalating moderation (still a work in progress).
Some of the spam comments were not removed few days ago because we are overwhelmed sometimes and trying to catch up, but that’s no excuse.
@EMCprotocol@zed.emc, as per below tweet (EMC is about to migrate to Arbitrum.), could you please clarify what it means for your relation to ICP, EMC presale token etc?
Excuse me, no need to reply. I’m just here grabbing a screenshot of this before it disappears (like the community’s money after they bought into the EMC presale and NFTs on ICP, and then the project jumped ship to another chain).
It just goes to show that even “legit startups” can’t be trusted in the space because it’s all about money.
Thank you for this post, Wenzel! Unfortunately, I’m out of "I told you so"s at this time. I just came here to remind everyone that this is exactly why we need MORE criticism that PROTECTS the community and less “offering support” by encouraging the ever-shrinking ICP community to give their money to projects that showed serious warning signs from the beginning.
[Edited to remove an unfair comment about forum moderation - thanks for taking it so well, Diego]
Just wanted to follow up yet again (is this the third or fourth time I’ve mentioned something - I’ve lost count) on these restless, baseless, personal attacks upon my character!
I, like the creator of @Caesar (seemingly @wpb based off the obsession that this Caesar account quite clearly has revolving around me & him🤣), could also create endless alt accounts, slander people in the forums, and make a mockery of this community - yet choose not to out of respect for this ecosystem.
On the other hand, Ivan GPT doesn’t care.
Looking forward to whichever direction you take this!
This accusation is utterly unfounded. It’s evident that, in this context, @Accumulating.icp is spreading baseless rumors about both me and @wpb that hold no truth
Every one sees through your charade - one glance at your account is enough to see what’s going on.
I find it hilarious that you’ve now deleted the previous message, within which you baselessly accused me of “orchestrating fud”, in an attempt to craft a narrative behind this scenario.