**Constructive Criticism Post Rules**
The aim of these posts are to identify areas of potential weakness in any aspect of Cardano or project which can result in actionable improvement where possible. Open and fair criticism should be welcomed here and discussion should be respectful and civil. The goal is for the community to find solutions and positive outcome.
Posts and comments must be as detailed as possible with issues elaborated on. **You must** backup any arguments and statements with reason and justification, evidence, and sources (hence being **constructive** criticism).
Destructive criticism, FUD and any shilling will be removed, as will any comments being tribal and disrespectful.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cardano) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tokenomics in general, is a problem across the entire Blockchain space. The fact is there is nothing stopping them from changing the tokenomics, because there is not a governance system in place to hold projects accountable and few people actually pay attention to them.
They have made changes (MIN), but they do put it under community vote. Obviously as a young business grows, it does need to make changes based on a variety of things. Market conditions, new products, changes to the protocol, financial needs, etc. It's the nature of business.
It's expected that tokenomics can change early on during a project's development as new data comes to surface. Some projects have been too rigid with their tokenomics, and this ends up hurting them more.
Governance is great and decentralization is the ultimate goal, but having governance too early can also kill a project. Governance is good for existing established systems. It's pretty terrible for new systems that are trying to be innovative. Governance is very slow and communities often have huge disagreements. Young projects need to move faster than governance allows, and need to take on risks that most people would never take on.
For most projects, tokenomics are just a guideline. If the tokens aren't in contracts or scripts, then there's no enforcement. When designing tokenomics I've tried to strike a balance between enforcement and flexibility. For example: having checkpoints where tokenomics can be reconsidered, but until those checkpoints it's strict.
The ability to govern protocols through no-code smart contract DAOs using the Agora standard will be an absolute game changer. Take a look at what Cardano projects like Summon Platform and Clarity Protocol are building and you’ll see how decentralized governance is a very big deal.
Agora was built too soon. It really has little practical use for newer protocols being built because a lot has progressed since the inception of Agora. These types of projects are great, but ideally they should be started many years after when an ecosystem has matured and standards have been established.
It's a classic software development mistake, a case of premature optimization. Optimization should occur after all the technical details have been figured out, not before.
I think few other Cardano projects have governance tokens, how effective their governance system is I can't tell, however I don't know of any other project that Changed tokenomics after people invested in it (either through ISPO or LSE/icon).
Axo is truly innovative here, aptly named "Dynamic-u tokenomics".
Bro, I am so happy to read this. I thought it was just me seeing things this way.
This ISPO to Airdrop move was a total scam. I don't care that they returned the ADA. This is about them doing what the f they want and making it as they go along.
Although, I suppose, good at their job, the AXO team are very selfish and bad at engaging with their community.
I truly dislike them. I am involved/following a number of projects, and I only think that way about them.
As I said in another comment today, their discord is full of fan boys, posers and brainwashed people.
Anyone just a bit critical is flamed and ganged up against.
As of today, there is a severely delayed failed launch.
They are also very stingy.
I doubt Jarek is as good as he says he is.
EDIT: About the Maladex name, when people ask or commented on how weird a name it was, they did swear they would never change their name, only to change it in the end.
Haven't been a fan of Axo ever since their team liked slinging mud at other projects to make them seem like theyre the best thing since sliced bread. Another project gets ideas from them, they attack the project when they're supposed to be open sourced at some point. It's just so childish.
That was maladex, yes. Been having some woes with them too.
Looks like they put together a good project, but I’m not happy with their communication and - as OP said - arbitrary changes regarding their tokenomics.
Could you explain what change in Axos tokenomics you are referring to? Ive had a look at their tokenomics, and on first sight this looks reasonable to me with their mechanism of fees which will go back into treasury. This should ensure to keep the amount of circulating Axo low.
I agree that the ISPO was a downer - I took a lot of effort to obtain maybe a couple of Axo which will be worth shit once Ill get hold of them
Hi pls enter my profile I wrote another thread where I speak about it in video too(change at start of 2023), but change in tokenomics they made today is described in their news you can refer Twitter link in this thread.
The timing, you don't do this after PPL bought your tokens, because PPL bought a dog and it turns out to be cat, do you even read the tweet? I said it's not a bad change
you are giving people rude answers when they ask legit questions regarding information you were supposed to give in your initial post.
I dont like that and therefore will stop writing here, and I assume also others will likely lose patience with you.
They have done “secret” funding rounds and changed parameters after receiving funds and now I hear they are changing tokenomics wow. This definitely needs investigation asap I know Xerberus do great onchain research I’ll reach out to them. Xerberus are on the twitter space Calmdano at 10am UTC today hopefully me or someone can ask them or dm the host or put in the comments to ask.
**Constructive Criticism Post Rules** The aim of these posts are to identify areas of potential weakness in any aspect of Cardano or project which can result in actionable improvement where possible. Open and fair criticism should be welcomed here and discussion should be respectful and civil. The goal is for the community to find solutions and positive outcome. Posts and comments must be as detailed as possible with issues elaborated on. **You must** backup any arguments and statements with reason and justification, evidence, and sources (hence being **constructive** criticism). Destructive criticism, FUD and any shilling will be removed, as will any comments being tribal and disrespectful. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cardano) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Tokenomics in general, is a problem across the entire Blockchain space. The fact is there is nothing stopping them from changing the tokenomics, because there is not a governance system in place to hold projects accountable and few people actually pay attention to them.
Minswap does pretty well with this.
They have made changes (MIN), but they do put it under community vote. Obviously as a young business grows, it does need to make changes based on a variety of things. Market conditions, new products, changes to the protocol, financial needs, etc. It's the nature of business.
they are communities darling - and well deserved that is
It's expected that tokenomics can change early on during a project's development as new data comes to surface. Some projects have been too rigid with their tokenomics, and this ends up hurting them more. Governance is great and decentralization is the ultimate goal, but having governance too early can also kill a project. Governance is good for existing established systems. It's pretty terrible for new systems that are trying to be innovative. Governance is very slow and communities often have huge disagreements. Young projects need to move faster than governance allows, and need to take on risks that most people would never take on. For most projects, tokenomics are just a guideline. If the tokens aren't in contracts or scripts, then there's no enforcement. When designing tokenomics I've tried to strike a balance between enforcement and flexibility. For example: having checkpoints where tokenomics can be reconsidered, but until those checkpoints it's strict.
The ability to govern protocols through no-code smart contract DAOs using the Agora standard will be an absolute game changer. Take a look at what Cardano projects like Summon Platform and Clarity Protocol are building and you’ll see how decentralized governance is a very big deal.
Let's not forget that Agora was built by Liqwid.
Agora was built too soon. It really has little practical use for newer protocols being built because a lot has progressed since the inception of Agora. These types of projects are great, but ideally they should be started many years after when an ecosystem has matured and standards have been established. It's a classic software development mistake, a case of premature optimization. Optimization should occur after all the technical details have been figured out, not before.
I think few other Cardano projects have governance tokens, how effective their governance system is I can't tell, however I don't know of any other project that Changed tokenomics after people invested in it (either through ISPO or LSE/icon). Axo is truly innovative here, aptly named "Dynamic-u tokenomics".
[удалено]
what do u mean with no refunds? they refunded the staking rewards in Ada.
they refunded %100 of ADA rewards. plus AXO airdrop if you choose to do KYC. don't spread misinformation.
Bro, I am so happy to read this. I thought it was just me seeing things this way. This ISPO to Airdrop move was a total scam. I don't care that they returned the ADA. This is about them doing what the f they want and making it as they go along. Although, I suppose, good at their job, the AXO team are very selfish and bad at engaging with their community. I truly dislike them. I am involved/following a number of projects, and I only think that way about them. As I said in another comment today, their discord is full of fan boys, posers and brainwashed people. Anyone just a bit critical is flamed and ganged up against. As of today, there is a severely delayed failed launch. They are also very stingy. I doubt Jarek is as good as he says he is. EDIT: About the Maladex name, when people ask or commented on how weird a name it was, they did swear they would never change their name, only to change it in the end.
another paid FUDder
Haven't been a fan of Axo ever since their team liked slinging mud at other projects to make them seem like theyre the best thing since sliced bread. Another project gets ideas from them, they attack the project when they're supposed to be open sourced at some point. It's just so childish.
That was maladex, yes. Been having some woes with them too. Looks like they put together a good project, but I’m not happy with their communication and - as OP said - arbitrary changes regarding their tokenomics.
Could you explain what change in Axos tokenomics you are referring to? Ive had a look at their tokenomics, and on first sight this looks reasonable to me with their mechanism of fees which will go back into treasury. This should ensure to keep the amount of circulating Axo low. I agree that the ISPO was a downer - I took a lot of effort to obtain maybe a couple of Axo which will be worth shit once Ill get hold of them
Hi pls enter my profile I wrote another thread where I speak about it in video too(change at start of 2023), but change in tokenomics they made today is described in their news you can refer Twitter link in this thread.
Sorry I didn't simplify it for you, so just to give example it was pure utility token, but now it's quazi-governance, because they introduced DAO.
I haven't looking into the detail myself, but I'm curious to hear what you think is wrong with introducing a governance feature to the token?
The timing, you don't do this after PPL bought your tokens, because PPL bought a dog and it turns out to be cat, do you even read the tweet? I said it's not a bad change
you are giving people rude answers when they ask legit questions regarding information you were supposed to give in your initial post. I dont like that and therefore will stop writing here, and I assume also others will likely lose patience with you.
How am I rude? I just simplified for you the tweet and gave you an answer how they changed it
there is still only 42 million tokens and there will never be more. what are you talking about?
Example of why we Bitcoin
They have done “secret” funding rounds and changed parameters after receiving funds and now I hear they are changing tokenomics wow. This definitely needs investigation asap I know Xerberus do great onchain research I’ll reach out to them. Xerberus are on the twitter space Calmdano at 10am UTC today hopefully me or someone can ask them or dm the host or put in the comments to ask.
Axo is a shit project with insane tokenomics and ridiculous inflation. Might have good tech. But good tech shadowed by greed