Around the Cosmoverse
Votes to follow
Forum threads to follow
Forum spotlight
Synopsis
In favour of the proposal
Opposed to the proposal
My Two Cents
In a benevolent gesture of support, the Stargaze community rallied together to mint out Krusty Kritters after the passing of Brandon, a member of the team behind the collection.
https://twitter.com/StargazeZone/status/1648024543116554251
Osmosis launchpad, Streamswap, goes live on mainnet with its first token launch, $FLIX.
https://twitter.com/OmniFlixNetwork/status/1649110788982833171
Supercharged liquidity, Osmosis’ long-awaited version of concentrated liquidity is teased.
https://twitter.com/superliquidity/status/1648568024113315840
Stakecito validator on Evmos gets tombstoned following a double-signing incident, causing a 10% slash to all their delegators. The team quickly reacted with a post-mortem and confirmed a refund plan to make affected users whole. In the following 24 hours, 243,315 $EVMOS ( over 80k$) was airdropped to all affected delegators, resulting in 100% refund.
Osmosis community has just voted in favour of the Osmosis 2.0 tokenomics. The new token design was introduced to on-chain governance in 3 separate proposals, each highlighting one of the proposed improvements:
Decrease the Superfluid Risk Factor to 25% The proposal aims to allow 75% of $OSMO tokens locked in the liquidity pools that support Superfluid Staking to be staked. Currently, Osmosis only allows for 50% of $OSMO to be Superfluid Staked. The passing of the proposal will benefit $OSMO Liquidity Providers in Superfluid-enabled pools with a 50% increase on their Superfluid Staking rewards.
Lengthen OSMO Emission Schedule A quick refresher on $OSMO emissions: there are currently 547,945 $OSMO emitted every day. The daily emitted amount is reduced by a third every year until it reaches 1 Billion $OSMO, this event is referred to by the ‘Thirdening’. The proposal suggests: cutting the $OSMO emissions by half before the next Thirdening and making the latter a 2-year event.
Adjust the Ratio of Emissions The emitted $OSMO will be modified as follows:
Staking: 25% → 50%
Pool Incentives: 13.5% → 20%
Community Pool: 36.5% → 5%
Developer Rewards: 25% → 25%
The Cosmos Hub’s community is currently voting on 2 proposals:
Introducing the Liquid Staking Module to regulate $ATOM liquid staking. If you’d like to learn more about the proposal, I’ve covered it in my previous NL.
A Community Pool Spend in which the proposer is requesting 50,000 $ATOM (roughly 600k$) to set up a legal defence fund after being sued by his former employer, All in Bits, for breach of contract.
Mars Protocol has voted in favour of two proposals
Adding support to $axlWETH & $axlWBTC on the Red Bank. Therefore enabling lending and borrowing of Axelar bridged Ethereum and Bitcoin.
Raising the deposit cap to $axlUSDC on the Reb Bank to 3M$.
Stride’s proposal to join the Hub’s economic zone and adopt Interchain Security has been approved by the Stride community via on-chain governance. Stride is offering to share its revenues with the Cosmos Hub as follows:
15% of liquid staking rewards
15% of STRD inflationary staking rewards
15% of maximal extractible value (MEV) revenue
15% of transaction fees
In exchange, Stride will benefit from the economic security of the Hub. The leading liquid staking provider also requests 450,000 $ATOM to seed liquidity for its $ATOM/ $stATOM pool on the Astroport DEX that will be deployed on Neutron, the first chain to benefit from Interchain Security. Pending the approval of the Cosmos Hub on the same proposal, Stride will officially be the first App Chain to join the Hub’s economic zone.
Following a successful token launch via Osmosis launchpad, Streamswap, the Omniflix community have voted in favour of activating inflation of the $FLIX token.
Umee votes in favour of adding support to $stkATOM, Persistence liquid staking token for $ATOM. The community is also currently voting on increasing the deposit caps for $stATOM & $stOSMO to 500,000 & 2,000,000 respectively.
Stargaze, the ecosystem’s leading NFT marketplace, has voted in favour of increasing the developer royalties on the marketplace to further attract builders to the platform.
Before:
10% dev royalties
40% burned
50% returned to stakers
After:
50% burned.
50% dev royalties (Goes to stakers instead if no dev royalties).
Adding support for $qATOM, Quicksilver’s LST for $ATOM, on the Umee markets
Grace Yu, a former All in Bits employee, requests 50,000 $ATOM from the Cosmos Hub community pool for legal expenses.
On 3/23/23, All in Bits filed a legal complaint against Grace Yu, for the alleged breach of a mutual non-disparagement clause. AiB seeks damages of at least $150,000. Grace claims that AiB's legal pleading has multiple factual errors, false and misleading representations, and allegations of a conspiracy by former employees and Cosmos community leaders.
In a controversial and divisive proposal, Grace pleaded her case to the Hub’s community via on-chain governance, requesting over $600,000 in $ATOM to set up a legal defence fund.
Major ecosystem contributors such as Notional, Strangelove and Iqlusion were the first to voice their support to the proposal. Their argument is that Cosmos, as a community, should protect the integrity of its open-source environment and not allow organisations to bully ecosystem contributors. And support for this initiative will set a precedent for all organisations, demonstrating that such behaviour is unacceptable.
It’s worth mentioning that:
Jacob Gadikian from Notional, Jack Zampolin from Strangelove, and Zaki Manian from Iqlusion were all allegedly accused of similar behaviour as Grace in the lawsuit.
Zaki Manian is one of the major donors to Grace’s GoFundMe page, which was created soon after multiple validators voiced their opposition to the proposal.
Several community members and validators were strongly opposed to the proposal. The reasons behind this are less related to the lawsuit in itself and more about how money in the community pool should be spent. There are growing concerns within the community that as of lately, the Hub’s community pool is being exhausted carelessly and those opposed fear that supporting this proposal will make this worse by setting a precedent.
There are valid arguments from both sides of the community.
The idea of protecting the integrity of the Hub’s open-source environment is valid and sends a strong message that the ecosystem stands behind contributors and builders.
On the other hand, resorting to the community pool to settle disputes between contributors within the ecosystem is not the right approach in my opinion and sets a bad precedent for future funding requests.
The proposal is still up for voting, you can check it out here.
Thank you for reading! I hope you enjoyed the Cosmos Council, a weekly newsletter to keep you up to date with everything governance in the Cosmos. Hit the subscribe button and follow me on twitter to stay up to date!
See you next week!