I am deeply saddened by this decision as I fear it may force skilled developers to leave IC. I am surprised to see barriers being imposed on DeFi platforms, which in turn will be a place of useless social media dapps which will not bring any value into our ecosystem
After reviewing Sonic’s current DAO proposal, I have concerns about the potential for concerted attacks from propaganda teams, leading to loss of confidence in SNS.
This is incorrect,
When we look into their proposed allocation they have allocated 25% for trading rewards and 7.5% to LP providers. Its a reward system which will helpful to bring more value to platform and beneficial for investors who put money in the platform (Ref: uniswap, pancakeswap, dydx).
Lets analyze some project approach towards airdrop
Previous SNS project, Open chat allocated 0% for airdrop, very smart plan and good for SNS investors.
Kinic is airdropping 4% against 150 NFT which they have used to raise1500 ICP(160 token/ICP) few months back. They are now proposing a 25% airdrop against 1.5M ICP (at a rate of 1 token/ICP). While this may lead to a lottery for all NFT participants if the hard cap is met, but it could potentially bad for SNS investors.
Help me understand this please,
That said, i guess i doesn’t matter which direction Dfinity moves (vote yes, no or abstain) people will always find reasons to complain.
Nobody is pushing builders away, there was a standard for them to meet they decided to not meet it and continue with the lunch how is that Dfinity fault?.
If they had done the audit they wone be in this kind of situation, all Dfinity is after is the safety of the network and users, they can always create another SNS proposal but let them do the Right things first
Like!!, its really tiring when Dfinity tired to do something for our own safety, does not seem like people see it at all, why are they in a hurry to start the SNS lunch when they could actually do it after the have completed the security Audit.
Is ICP not supposed to be decentralized?, why are you looking up to Dfinity before you make your own decisions?, Sonic did not meet the Security Audit requirements, how is that Dfinity fault, all Dfinity is trying to do is protect you and me, yet we don’t appreciate them for it.
nothing is forcing anyone away, they were not asked or begged to come on the IC in the first place, there are standards to be met, they did not meet it and went ahead to start the SNS proposal, you expect dfinity to still support them?, if they had done the right things we wont be here RN, they did not need to be in a hurry to start their own SNS, atleats meet all requirements first
Just to be fully transparent,
I do understand what they are trying to do, security audits are pretty expensive for small projects. If you can find a company they throw with prices ranging from 20k to 80k for an audit for small to midsize projects. And then you don’t even have a company that has knowledge about the IC and its security.
But this triggers a “trust me bro” scenario, where we need to trust the developers that they actually do the audit after they received the funds from the sale. I’m personally not a fan of that approach.
They could also save some earnings from Sonic, do a crowdfund or apply for a grant to accommodate for these costs (partially).
Anyway, I will wait for the results of the vote. Hopefully a team with security/technical skills will join the SNS.
It’s not bad to abstain but if you’re going to do so for security reasons give the project a heads up so they have a chance to fix themselves. If Dfinity has indeed done then I apologize.
Dfinity can do whatever it wants and that’s fair. My issue is how it was done or at least the way it looks to me.
There is more time ahead of us. I don’t see the point. It is not like they can’t submit again… Plus this is all an experiment. Not saying everything is perfect but def not the end of the world. I am also changing who my neurons follow based on how they vote on diff issues, that is the great part of this experiment.
Some community members pointed out some excessive fees charged during swaps. DFinity has also guided Sonic to rectify some other things. This is DEFI, so we must hold it to a high standard. Wouldnt touch it without a security review, unless with a little gambling money.
Proposal to approve or reject Dump(RUG)
If you have the majority you can approve dump or your syndicate projects.
Yes I think Defi Products should think all things before coming to this otherwise we will kick you out…
So my suggestion to all developers is to go ahead with some scrap browsers or social media websites and raise 1-2 Million ICP.
LAMO
This makes no sense. You’ll have to audit all of these projects if this is the case.
The insider favoritism that goes on at Dfinity is seriously killing any chance you’ll have at a successful blockchain. Developers are already leaving and now this will ensure people don’t come here at all. I’m completely lost that Dfinity can’t ever get out of their own way 
The Sonic team has been working tirelessly for years. Not an experiment to them. Again, developers will not waste their time on experiments.
I don’t think it’s necessary to blame the person who refuses, the motivation of the refusal is to use people’s money more safely. Even if sonic rejects this time, it can still do the next time. sonic that solves the security problem will jump higher next time, right?
I don’t really understand the “if” part of this sentence. @bjoernek already replied to you, it has been mentioned in this thread: It mentions the lack of security review and points to DFINITY’s previously published voting guidelines, sent 11 days ago.