Thanks @fomowell for your responses and the new year wishes.
I personally think it’s a shame that this was done. It makes it difficult to see how the project has evolved over time, and when and why certain decisions were made. Ultimately shared ownership of this codebase is being given to the SNS community that participates in the sale. Without the history, it makes it harder for people to see and understand what they’re getting ownership over.
Are they not removed as a result of handing control over to the SNS (when this proposal executes)? If not then this will prevent any real decentralisation, unless I’m mistaken. Here are the current controllers for the web assets canister that’s supposed to become decentralised (4xi2o):
Only one of those controllers is decentralised (NNS Root). Simply adding an SNS Root controller won’t make this canister decentralised (changes could be forced at any point using the other controllers, without requiring any proposal).
Same story for the backend canister (52g6a). Current controllers are:
I thought all other controllers (other than NNS Root) are removed when a new SNS proposal such as this executes. Your comment above has made me unsure about this, and if it is the case that these controllers are removed, it means that the cycles monitoring and other canister will lose control that I presume is required for them to function properly?
gjnxz-siaaa-aaaai-qpebq-cai has two controllers - 52g6a-iaaaa-aaaam-acsza-cai and ko6sb-zwe67-hhmjq-x4f77-vk2os-h5cc4-lv55n-gmw3k-dv2cz-gkwgg-bqe.
3dod7-xaaaa-aaaam-ab5ca-cai has a different controller,
5vdms-kaaaa-aaaap-aa3uq-cai is a blockhole.
The main question is do you need these canisters controlled by the SNS? What are the functionalities?
Hey @jennifertran, could you confirm that all controllers are removed from canisters that are listed to become decentralised when a proposal such as this executes (leaving only NNS Root, and SNS Root)?
It seems it’s “the blackholed balance checker canister, 5vdms-kaaaa-aaaap-aa3uq-cai that https://cycleops.dev uses to monitor and top-up 3rd-party canisters”
Byron from the CycleOps team here. Once your SNS is live you should be able to set up CycleOps SNS monitoring, which takes 10 minutes to complete, and doesn’t require a single line of code or controller to be added to canisters that are directly controlled by the SNS.
As a follow-up to this, @fomowell, do you still need your cycles monitoring canister which will be removed as a controller of your SNS dapp canisters or will you use a service such as CycleOps SNS monitoring?
Hi, Lorimer. Thanks for your question.
In order to ensure the cycle status normal and safe, we use many canisters to monitor their status. After SNS, we will use third party CycleOps to manage and monitor our Cycles status.
gjnxz-siaaa-aaaai-qpebq-cai is used for cycle monitoring
3dod7-xaaaa-aaaam-ab5ca-cai is a canister for our developers to monitor cycles.
5vdms-kaaaa-aaaap-aa3uq-cai is CycleOps Blackhole, which is also used for cycle monitoring.
In order to ensure the cycle status normal and safe, we use many canisters to monitor their status.
Hi Byron, thanks a lot for your suggestion, we already started to learn and test your monitor system, after SNS, we will use it to manage our project cycle status.
I’ve been following the discussion about canisters, but I’m starting to feel confused because I don’t see any apparent issue.
The team proposes to decentralize 52g6a-iaaaa-aaaam-acsza-cai and 4xi2o-hiaaa-aaaam-acs6q-cai.
Currently, these two canisters have multiple controllers, but the NNS root has already been added.
If the swap succeeds, as I understand it according documentation, all existing controllers will be removed, and control will be transferred to the SNS Root canister.
In other words, after a successful swap, these two canisters would be controlled by a single entity—the SNS.
None of the other canisters mentioned in this thread (gjnxz-siaaa-aaaai-qpebq-cai, 3dod7-xaaaa-aaaam-ab5ca-cai, and 5vdms-kaaaa-aaaap-aa3uq-cai) are currently controlled by the two canisters proposed for decentralization. Even if they were and as long it would be explained why it would be that way, I don’t think it would be an issue since the canisters in question are intended to become decentralized.
Given this, I’m not sure to understand what the concern in this discussion is — or if there’s even an issue at all? Am I missing something?
The discussion has come from questions to understand if there is an issue. @fomowell’s last answer makes it clear that there isn’t one
This has been my understanding too, though some answers provided show that this wasn’t expected by the proposer (which made me second guess my own understanding). Given that some of the controllers that would be removed are canisters, understanding what these are for ensures that the severed dependencies would not cause part of the solution to break or fall over after this proposal executes.
The control is in the other direction (these canisters currently control the two due to be decentralised).
Prior to the answers that came from this discussion, it wasn’t clear what the controlling canisters were for, whether their functionality was critical, and whether this solution would break after the proposal executed due to severed dependencies.
The discussion also indicated that the proposer had the impression that these controllers would remain in control of the canisters until a later date. I think this discussion has clarified matters, and now there seem to be plans in place to mitigate that issue.
I’ve just adopted this proposal. Thanks for you patience and answers @fomowell
What are the advantages compared to other icp-meme fair-launch platforms? For example, bob.fun, they seem to have more active users, more successfully launched projects, and smoother products.
Hi, Bleep. Thanks a lot for your question.
We totally agree with you that bob. fun is great project, no matter Blockchain-on-Blockchain (BOB) design or community attraction.
Fomowell also has its own features, as the first memecoin launchpad on ICP, it offers the following key advantages:
Guaranteed DEX Liquidity: Seamless trading via ICPEX & ICPSwap (live), KongSwap & Sonic (in progress).
Cycle Warning Mechanism: Enhanced security and informed decision-making for users.
AI Integration: Intelligent automation for token management, issuance, and meme creation (in development).
Strong Community & Partnerships: Active community and key ICP partnerships (DOGMI, SNEEDDAO). DAO structures enable locking LP within the community, deploying excess liquidity to multiple DEXs.
Fair Launch Focus: Equitable environment for creators and participants.
FomoWell’s focus on liquidity, security, and community, plus active project interest and a growing following, positions us as a leading force in the ICP meme space. We anticipate more successful launches soon.
Hello Fomowell team,
I created a coin named Ron7Fan to be traded on ICPSWAP, but it didn’t go well when it reached 5k of MC. the pool was created on ICPEx instead, and still so far no tradable. I need your help on this.
the pool is on: ICPEx
I need your help.
Feature Improvements: Token holders have the power to propose new features, optimize current functionalities, and suggest UI adjustments. This includes everything from adding new trading pairs to enhancing the overall user experience and integrating innovative tools.
Fund Allocation: The community gets a say in how funds within the treasury are allocated, including initiatives like marketing campaigns, technical development, and investing in promising projects.
Partner Selection: Token holders can vote on potential strategic partnerships, whether it’s with other DeFi protocols, NFT projects, or community organizations.
Fee Structure Adjustments: The flexibility to adjust transaction fees or listing fees ensures that the platform can adapt to market trends and user needs.
Tokenomics Adjustments: There may be times when adjusting token allocations, burning mechanisms, or staking rewards becomes necessary to optimize the token’s economy and ensure its growth.
By actively participating in these areas, WELL token holders play an integral role in shaping the direction of the project, fostering a more dynamic and inclusive ecosystem.
Feature Improvements: Token holders have the power to propose new features, optimize current functionalities, and suggest UI adjustments. This includes everything from adding new trading pairs to enhancing the overall user experience and integrating innovative tools.
Fund Allocation: The community gets a say in how funds within the treasury are allocated, including initiatives like marketing campaigns, technical development, and investing in promising projects.
Partner Selection: Token holders can vote on potential strategic partnerships, whether it’s with other DeFi protocols, NFT projects, or community organizations.
Fee Structure Adjustments: The flexibility to adjust transaction fees or listing fees ensures that the platform can adapt to market trends and user needs.
Tokenomics Adjustments: There may be times when adjusting token allocations, burning mechanisms, or staking rewards becomes necessary to optimize the token’s economy and ensure its growth.
By actively participating in these areas, WELL token holders play an integral role in shaping the direction of the project, fostering a more dynamic and inclusive ecosystem.
