Flashstake Protocol | FLASH Community Funds Proposal #XIOfeedback

The Flashstake community has been coming up with ideas that require funding and approval. Not all ideas that the Flashstake community has may align with what the Blockzero community want, which can be frustrating to some Flashstake community members. Instead of being fully reliant on Blockzero governance for approval and Foundation tokens for funding, what if the Flashstake community could be more self sufficient and be able to get some things they want to see done by having their own pool of FLASH tokens to flashstake for funding?

This proposal might be the quickest, easiest, and most efficient way to get some funds and decision making power to the Flashstake community ASAP, to alleviate having to ask the Blockzero core or community for permission for the ideas they have, therefore helping remove some of the micromanagement and friction that currently exists. This could also allow a way for FLASH holders to be the primary decision makers with how these specific funds are used.

Questions for the community to refine this proposal regarding these FLASH Community Funds (“FCF”):

  1. How many FLASH tokens should be given as a one-time allocation from the Flash Funds to a FCF for this purpose?
  2. Who should control these FCF tokens? Should a multisig be created and if so who should have access to that multisig?
  3. How should these FCF be governed? Should they also use snapshot.org as we have used for $XIO voting?
  4. Should only FLASH holders/stakers/LPs be allowed to have a vote on how FCF is used?
  5. Should FCF only be allowed to be flashstaked and not transferred to other wallets?
  6. How do we ensure ideas align with the overall goals for Flashstake and does not go against the Blockzero brand or ethos?
  7. What do you like or not like about this proposal, is there anything you would want to add or change?

Note: we are only exploring this proposal as an idea at this stage and any feedback will help to structure it further. There is no commitment for this proposal at this point in time.

Feedback are eligible for #XIOfeedback credits.

3 Likes
  1. As much possible ad this is intended to use for the adoption of flash protocal.

  2. Multisig would be good. At the moment I see @ghullie, harry, @ercolethboss (TG user name as he have great interest in flashstake protocal), Stephan (s333rg telegram user name, as he have great business knowledge and can play crucial role) is great option to have access to the multisig.

  3. Yes

  4. Yes

  5. Yes as it will ensure we will always have the required funding available which would not drain over time.

  6. This will be used in the best interest of flash protocal so i think there are no chance that any ideas will not go against blockzero ethos.

1 Like
  1. At least 50% sounds good although I am wondering how many Flash Tokens we are talking about.

  2. The multisig idea is a good one. Otherwise I would say leave the control in the hands of BlockZero for safety.

  3. Yes the voting idea is good and people can come up with idea etc. through Telegram or on the forums.

  4. Yes only Flash holders to create another incentive to purchase Flash tokens.

  5. I can see the benefit of only allowing Flashstaking with the community funds but I also think that using some for competitions etc. would be useful.

  6. The voting idea that was suggested in the original post is a good idea, that way only Flash holders can vote.

  7. Not that I can think of right now but there will be more ideas posted on the forums and Telegram.

The more independent flash becomes the more it hurts XIO value proposition. If flash
and later AQUA can vote for itself then we go back to XIO proposition being only getting new tokens. We have been trying to change that hence the index fund.
Currently there are only 2 things connecting XIO to already established projects: index fund and governance.

I have an alternative proposition. What if when it comes to voting on flash only people who have both XIO and flash could vote? We could discuss the ideal measurement:
Option 1) You must have a minimum of 1000XIO and then you vote witt the power of your flash tokens. This means that if you want to participate in flash governance you must have some XIO (which helps XIO).
Option 2) You vote with minimum amount of your either XIO or Flash tokens. This ensures that people who have both interests at heart will vote.

Then we could do the same with AQUA except here it will be AQUA Xio and no flash.

1 Like

If flash holders want to grow on their own why restrict the capabilities. You guys are controlling flash protocal so much and then call it purely decentralized. When it shall be flash holders who should decide what goes around the protocal.

Coming to second point where you mentioned xio flash pair for voting, then you or anybody already have flash why force xio in the middle.

Xio holders are already being incentivized by airdrops , if they happen to sell their flash and now they want to control the flash protocal now, this is bad IMO.

Being the superior product, some bad decisions from blockzero labs like no marketing, minting tokens has affected the flash protocal so much, while other projects are booming and catching the momentum here we are dipping in the bull market.

But is this enough? My worry is that if XIO and Flash will stop being connected will flash and xio each strong enough to stand on its own?

There isn’t that much money in flash foundation (1 000 00 tokens I believe). There is so much more in XIO foundation.

If we don’t find a way to connect the project then we end up exactly in this situation where flash holders fight for flash and XIO holders for XIO and we just don’t move forward. If there is no connection to flash why would XIO holders want to use their money to fund flash? And if flash has its own governance and everything that what is the point of blockzero? If it’s just new airdrops, then there is no incentive to make the new tokens good. After all the XIo holders can just dump the new tokens and be done with it. We need a connection. Xio holders will then never vote for marketing or something along those lines for flash because they are better off using the money to fund development of new tokens.

Xio holders are already being incentivized by airdoprs , if they happen to sell their flash and now they want to control the flash protocal now, this is bad IMO.

This is a great point. That is why I suggested that we would do some combined voting.
Maybe we could do combined voting even on XIO governance not just flash. Let’s say you vote with the power of all of your blockzero tokens (whether its flash XIO or AQUA)

Just for disclaimer I hold both XIO and Flash.

I agree. I think we are fighting for the same thing, just trying to get it differently. I don’t want to empower flash by taking away from XIO but I also agree that we need to change something.

If the governance is transferred to flash holders, we can transfer revenue streams under flash protocal , not sure why need money from blokzero then.

1 million Is way too much if utilized well and can bring a lot of new capital and increase in revenue streams.

There will be flash fund and flash holder will decide how to use it, we can use it for marketing.

Looking at the previous hurdles had from blockzero say it for for marketing I would say flash would drive the governance for flash. Thanks and period!

Interesting idea!

Depends on the amount of Flash, but a certain amount can be allocated for this. The question is difficult to answer without knowing the exact numbers. I would say a minimum of 200k FLASH (considering it can be staked and reused multiple times, e.g. stake for a month and use the yield for a marketing campaing).

Either multisig or BlockZero could have the “power button”.

Yes, this is the best way.

Yes, the person should hold Flash. But as other people mention here, I think whatever decision is taken it shouldn’t affect XIO holders and BZ project in general.

Yes, that way these funds can be re-used multiple times and we prevent attacks from malignant agents.

I am not sure how is this possible but maybe one solution could be what other posters mention: the voter should hold both Flash and XIO.

I like the idea that this can speed up the marketing and efforts on Flash but we have to be wary that this does not affect BZ in a negative way.

Hi, I do not agree that Flash Protocol should be community driven.
I would like the team to get more involved with Flash Protocol because Flash is a $ 1 billion idea maybe even bigger.

Flash is not like Bomb Token just an experiment I would like to see Flash in the Top 25 on CoinGecko

Thanks for taking the time to write this up! :slight_smile:

As mentioned previously (via DM) I think the best approach is to figure out this problem for the short term and allow the FLASH community to vote on proposals to help further the project until we have a more concrete governance proposal in place. I would therefore not be a fan of having recurring funds go to this pool of funds but instead treat this as a one-time thing.

I see this as an experiment to see how fast voting and governance can impact the project. I’d like to start seeing ideas form in Telegram, have a loose proposal and then have people vote and transfer the funds. I’m hoping that a slimmer process might yield better results but this is to be seen.

The foundation fund currently has just over 1 million FLASH. I think somewhere around 100,000 to 200,000 FLASH tokens should be sufficient. This equates to somewhere between 11 to 26 eth if the funds are flashstaked. This is roughly 20,000 USD or just under 50,000 USD which can be used to further the project - eg paying smaller YouTubers to make videos/segments.

It should be a one-time allocation and once the stake has completed, these funds should be returned to the foundation fund.

I think it doesn’t matter too much who controls the funds from a wallet perspective. As long as the will of the people is carried out through governance (eg snapshot.page) then I am happy.

Yep I think we should use the same voting process but maybe decrease the amount of time needed for a vote to go through and lower the number of people/votes required to make a decision. I would like to see quick and often votes happening.

Yes I believe so.

Yes I believe so. The funds should also come back to the foundation once flashstaked I’d say.

As mentioned previously, I think we should look at this as more of an experiment to see what happens and then use that information going forward. This is NOT something we need to continue and it will always be down to the XIO holders whether we want to do this again IMO.

i’ve sold 2/3 of my xio stack just in the last 5 days… we are in a bear market for xio since august 2020 during a mega bull run of the most of the projects.

i’m staying just with my XLP coins (which are 1/3 of my total xio position).

I don’t know what to say about this last proposal but just one thing: it seems bearish for XIO. And XIO is already in a big bearish season.

XIO is the pivot and the center of all blockzero labs. If instead of driving value to it we continuously drain value from it i really don’t know where this is going.

In the last few days (4/5 days) i’ve seen some big wallets selling all their XIO’s position (including me) and there’s a reason for it.

in some ways we are not understanding the market and the money is telling us that.

2 Likes

This is one of the most important things I think. All these slow moves and decisions that happened in the past ~4 months or so are not the best course of action during a bullmarket IMO, since a lot of other projects move and grow way faster and we have to keep up. The bullmarket is a fast race, not a slow let’s-wait-to-see-what-others-do thing. I’m not a fan of Zucc, but his quote “Move fast and break things” is definitely what needs to be done during a bullmarket.

About the questions:

  1. This depends on the size of the Flash Funds, but I think a 30-50% should be enough. The remaining Flash Funds can be a good backup in case unprecedented things happen and there’s a need for more funding.
  2. A multisig would be very useful, and I would say that we should choose around 7 trusted users so there’s no power grab problem.
  3. I’m not very familiar with the snapshot.org, but if it doesn’t cost a lot of gas to vote I think it’s a good idea.
  4. Maybe a 20-80% or 30-70% voting ratio? Like XIO has 20%-30% voting power and FLASH 70-80%. Idk if it’s possible tho.
  5. Competitions would be good, but I think we should keep this idea for later. Competitions made now will probably be a circlejerk with just a few users, since not many people know about FLASH.
  6. Well, I don’t really see how this is a problem since most of the FLASH users want the price to grow and the project to be well known. I don’t see why Blockzero would be against this, and if they are then it means that they have a problem that needs to be solved, aka not wanting their projects to grow.
  7. Not really, it’s a pretty well thought-out proposal.

Disclaimer: I have both XIO and FLASH, but I mostly value projects by their price growth, not by their tech. Being in crypto for the tech is IMO a bagholder meme, we’re all here to make money and I think FLASH is the better option for price growth, especially in this bullmarket that will probably end by the end of the year or so. There are projects that went from zero to 100 mil marketcap in less than 2-3 months, and with no working product. It baffles me that we have the golden egg in our hands but in 4 months we barely reached 10-15mil. Anyway, I’ll end my rant here.

Completely agree. This should be a one time thing. Let’s see how well it works out.

1 Like

1. How many FLASH tokens should be given as a one-time allocation from the Flash Funds to a FCF for this purpose?

Not sure how much is currently in the flash funds but seeing that it is a one time allocation why not 70% seeing that it is one time and the flash fund can accumulate back.

2. Who should control these FCF tokens? Should a multisig be created and if so who should have access to that multisig?

These tokens should be control by persons who were the lead on flash…i think i remember hearing each project has a lead. If multisig gonna use then the lead and three other nomination from the community.

  1. How should these FCF be governed? Should they also use snapshot.org as we have used for $XIO voting?

Yes…I believe this is the ideal way of doing it.

  1. Should only FLASH holders/stakers/LPs be allowed to have a vote on how FCF is used?

No persons who have xio should have three quarters the voting power vs those who have flash.

5. Should FCF only be allowed to be flashstaked and not transferred to other wallets?

Yes its main purpose should be to flashstake and use by the community.

6. How do we ensure ideas align with the overall goals for Flashstake and does not go against the Blockzero brand or ethos?

By ensuring blockzero takes part in decision hence they have voting rights as well.

7. What do you like or not like about this proposal, is there anything you would want to add or change?

I like the fact that its laying out the foundation on how the community will decide on things and whether or not xio holders should have any say in what flash does. After all flash is blockzero first born.

  1. i think it should not be a one time event and initial allocation should be a smaller amount as a trial on how things are handled. perhaps 750k FLASH (another idea for source of these tokens - the 1 million additional FLASH that were minted for v1>v2 grace period buys should have around simialr amount left in it. Why not use whatever is left there as a starting point for FCF ?)

  2. Multisig wallet sounds fine but some members of core should also be part of the group

  3. snapshot.page sounds fine

  4. One of the main complain of people only holding FLASH is that they are not allowed to vote. I believe we should allow them to vote but there should be some requirement/restriction. Just random thoughts but if someone hold BOTH XIO and FLASH their vote weighs more, FLASH only should be weighed little less.

  5. Flashstaking those tokens will drain out the LP’s fairly quickly i believe.

  6. I think there should be a governing body setup with lets say 5 members (or 7) with atleast 2 (or 3) members should be someone from the team/core and rest for community that people can vote for (people interested would have to nominate themselves or we can pick few names of members who have been long time supporters of the projects and active participants. Those guys can evaluate all the goals.

This is a very good proposal. I have heard Zachary Dash speak often about the projects wanting them to be as decentralized as possible, giving the community the chance to make big decisions instead of going to the XIO core each time with new ideas, I am a fan of this vision.
My answers:
1.as much as possible
2.multisig
3.snapshot yes
4.only Flash and XIO holders/stakers/LPs should be able to vote . Preferably those holding both tokens, minimum of 1000 flash. This will ensure, that people, who care about the projects and also have skin in the game (are invested with their funds) are voting.
5.preferably only flashstake
6.that is a good question, I think it should be clear from the beginning when giving flash community a more free hand - is Flash going to be governed and to what part by XIO, or will it be independent? Maybe a ratio of governed by XIO team - up to 50% on decisions, whereas independent - 90% decisions by flashstakers and the core is involved only when absolutely necessary?
7.I like this proposal

Many said “all the funds possible”, but I’d say 50% of what the team could… Some funds must be kept safe for future ideas or for unseen situations

Well, at this point in mind I think that the team can be trusted with the funds. They did not run away with our money so far, they won’t in the future. We could probably change this in the future once the blockzero ecosystem will be more decentralized

Snapshot site is awesome and all of the big projects are using it (balancer, sushiswap etc…) so, I see it very fit to our and FLASH’s needs

Yes. If the votes are about FLASH’s future why would anyone not invested say something about it? Only stalkers and LP should vote (and holders)

Well, if they can be sent to other wallets, they could be traded and they will have a market value. I am not against it, I just cant foresee how this could unfold… Not easy to answer on this one

Well, a vote is a vote… And withe we decide to have a centralised platform with devs deciding or we have a platform to vote and the community decides… Or, our vote would only be taken into account by devs, but the devs reserve the right for the final decision.

I like the idea of democracy, but I don’t like this idea 100% simply because it adds another layer of complication on an already very complex ecosystem

  1. I would think 50-70%
  2. A Multisig is good. What about 5 people - 3 core and 2 non core citizens. Only 3-4 signatures needed for execution.
  3. Yes snapshot voting works well
  4. No. Definitely include XLP holders as they are the Foundation of Blockzerolabs.
  5. That is why XLP holders needs to be included in voting. You have to have long term skin in the game.
  6. I would definitely use a percentage (10%) to use purely for marketing, collaborations and education of new investors through social media and other platforms.

Keep Staking

DrLuke
:stethoscope: