Passed! - Nomadex AMM - WebDev.algo - 20240221

[tropic fjord]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11-yKPc2g1DHG3XpFjsRJfvbaJaghjmg-NHjJXcQ4Itk/edit?usp=sharing

Updated parts of the proposal based on the new information available to me

[tired token]

This will be on the Agenda for expediting this Friday. We will then find a DD candidate post successful vote.

[safe lantern]

Amazing

[safe lantern]

I will add this the tracker tonight 🫡 Thank you for the updates!

[safe lantern]

Community Review - Nomadex AMM - WebDev.algo - 20240221

[tired token]

Directors voted 3/3 in favour to expedite this proposal to the DD phase.

[tropic fjord]

Does this mean this proposal is in DD phase now?

[tired token]

Yes. You will be assinged a reviewer after the meeting this Wednesday.

Then the next vote will happen after the presentation the Wednesday after that.

[tropic fjord]

ok got it

[static mortar]

Looks good

[main nexus]

you mention "released on open sourcing of the relevant code". specifically for the 75M part: would there be a time where people could look at the code and see if it has any flaws in it during a specified timeframe and only then the release of the tokens?

also is it supposed to be 135M or 125M overall? its 135M right now

[tropic fjord]

I am not sure how much time it should be but I can agree to some reasonable time like few days or 1 week.

[main nexus]

yeah like 1 week just so it becomes obvious if the contracts are generally fine or not

[tropic fjord]

It is supposed to be 135M, now that it is clear that what's in bounty document is not final.

[tropic fjord]

BTW code is already open sourced for current version
#nomadex message

[main nexus]

oh thats great, didnt know that!

[tropic fjord]

UX improvements part is subjective so how do we think that can be made trustless?
Maybe when proposer requests release of UX tokens, governors can do a quick vote in discord if they think UX improvements are enough?

[main nexus]

thats still kinda subjective tho? but definitely better than a single person deciding this

my idea was to have a the specific list of things needed if you look up my recommendation last time. i essentially just clicked through multiple cpAMMs on different chains and noted what i saw there. then the only subjective thing becomes the style these functions are presented

but in the end there would be still the subjective component and i guess a governor vote would be the easiest way

maybe we could even have a general vote in discord to see if people like it or not and then have the governor vote so we can use the feedback by all users

[tropic fjord]

Updated the token quantity section of the proposal (further splitting of token amounts)

The only subjective part would be this

15,000,000 VIA
For improvements to the design of the application. Released when majority governors think improvements made were enough and open sourcing of the relevant code.

[tired token]

@tough imp will be handling DD for this proposal. Expect him to reachout tomorrow evening EST.

[main nexus]

just checked you put in my old vague recommendations

that were my more detailed ones:

UI overhaul part

30,000,000 VIA (potential 50% payout if UI/UX improved but mentioned information is still missing or UI design didn't get overhauled in a significant way or users complaining about the UI being the majority) - General UI overhaul that adds basic information which can be generally found on AMMs (~), that adapts to the user (+) and makes the page overall more appealing in terms of design (#).

(~) includes at least:
-swap tab: price impact, fees needed to pay for this swap, price of 1 ASSETB per ASSETA used in the conversion when swapping from ASSETA to ASSETB, choose from/to asset via a search option (id + name) + list of assets (with assets being in a wallet at the top of the list?), min receive amount calculated using slippage
-pool tab: est. pool APRs, volume, personal liquidity easily visible, search option for pairs, TVL (measured in VOI for testnet if possible), remove liquidity only visible if you have liquidity in that pool

(+): persons liquidity should be easily visible and trackable, should be easy to swap the tokens people have in their wallet without them having to go through a long list to find them

(#): atm it's not clear what is clickable and what not (from/to swap for example), atm it's grey in grey without any color accents or greater differences in color to highlight specific parts of the page which could lead to users not seeing important information

these came from just looking at some DEXs

[tropic fjord]

ok will update it tomorrow

[main nexus]

you can decide if you want to put something in to your proposal but having a more detailed list might make it easier for you to know what is missing and for the governors to know what to look for

[safe lantern]

1st Eval - Nomadex AMM - WebDev.algo - 20240221

[tropic fjord]

Updated the proposal's token quantity section.

[tropic fjord]

Hey @tough imp - Let me know if you have some questions for me.

[tough imp]

Will reach out shortly!

[main nexus]

my evaluation

"Appreciate WebDev including a lot of the feedback from their last proposal!

Afaik either older versions or the current version of the smart contracts are already OSed. If only older SCs are OSed i think there should a 7 day period between OSing the new contracts and releasing the tokens for a given milestone. If bugs are found the release of the tokens should be halted until they are fixed. This is just a way to ensure that rather obvious (and therefore easily exploitable?) bugs are not present in the code. It might not make super sense in this case since older and newer SCs might not differ by a lot but I think something similar to this could be good for general future proposals so it could be a good test.

Limit order tab shouldn't look 1-1 to an orderbook since these orders use an AMM to get executed which means price changes when an order gets executed. There should be a way to (1) see how much order volume at a specific price point (rounded) and (2) a way to see explicit orders at a specific price point. General "bars" like on classical orderbooks wouldn't be as helpful.

Reduce amount of tokens for current limit orders by at least 5M tokens since the current version is not really user friendly imo. Also reduce the order limit UI improvements by 5M since it's the UI/UX for a not super important part of the proposal. This would bring it down to 125M max again which is more fair i think. I just don't see limit orders on cpAMMs being an amazing thing as we have seen with deflex on algorand. Also there is no incentive to run the OSed bot which means we rely potentially only on WebDev for limit orders to get executed which is kinda bad."

[tropic fjord]

I appreciate it. I am also curious to know what other governers think of the updated proposal (they may raise a point that should be included in the DD presentation).
Thanks

Is there a way to tag governers? like @governers

[main nexus]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1FwOlqhPKo6MgG0boErqJtJxFImBB7Yf0mj463TCbFYs/edit#gid=1830854301

[main nexus]

my understanding was proposers had access to this spreadsheet, that isn't the case? also tagging @tired token

[tired token]

Yes! Everyone can view this sheet. Full public transparency.

[tropic fjord]

Didn't know about this. Will look into it.

[safe lantern]

DD - Nomadex AMM - WebDev.algo - 20240221

[tropic fjord]

@tired token: What ways does WebDev think the UI/UX should be judged? Are they capable of a Humble or Tinyman level UI/UX?

I think updated proposal ("Token Quantity") addresses this. 25M VIA is assigned to UI/UX updates. out of which 12.5M to objective changes recommended by @main nexus . 12.5M to subjective stuff and governors will vote if they think changes made are enough. Let's see if I am capable of creating Humble or Tinyman level UI/UX.

@spare crow: Lots of feedback has been given on this & it feels like it's been resubmitted virtually unchanged asking for an additional 10M? I'm disappointed that more in the way of collaborative adjustments haven't been made to ensure this proposal's success this time around since it didn't pass last time. I'd like to see that. Important to note: I voted in support of this on it's last attempt. "

The reason 125M was asked is bounty document limited token amount 125M-75M. Now that we know bounty document is not given much weight so I have updated the proposal to what I think is fair amount. I was never asked to decrease the token amount instead was asked to split tokens for different features. Why do you think nothing has changed? A lot of things have changed in the proposal and website + smart contracts are open sourced, these being useless and faulty is open for you to judge on.

What do you think the token amount should be and why do you think so?

@tough imp: I like the DEX and believe he will continue to build it out in the way he states. Much of the token ask will be distributed when passed: 75m out 135m. I wonder if it would be wise to adjust that to make it a little less front heavy. If not, it isn't necessarily a deal breaker for me. I also recognize I've lost a little perspective being on hiatus so I may be unaware of previous token distribution context.

The token amount is front heavy because the work is front heavy as well. Let's see what already works.

• User can connect wallet (both Wallet Connect and Kibisis)
• User can create an ARC200 token on the website
• User can create pool for any ARC200 token
• User can bring their pool account online (for consensus participation) so liquidity providers earn block rewards
• User can add/remove liquidity
• User can swap
• User can see chart of pricing
• User can See swap txns as well as add/remove liquidity txns
• User can create limit orders (with ability to be partially filled)
• Limit order actually gets triggered when price on AMM changes (there is a priority to orders with the best price and older order are filled first)
• UI/UX is functional

Yes all of this needs improvements but it is functional .

[tropic fjord]

@main nexus : Appreciate WebDev including a lot of the feedback from their last proposal!

Afaik either older versions or the current version of the smart contracts are already OSed. If only older SCs are OSed i think there should a 7 day period between OSing the new contracts and releasing the tokens for a given milestone. If bugs are found the release of the tokens should be halted until they are fixed. This is just a way to ensure that rather obvious (and therefore easily exploitable?) bugs are not present in the code. It might not make super sense in this case since older and newer SCs might not differ by a lot but I think something similar to this could be good for general future proposals so it could be a good test.

Limit order tab shouldn't look 1-1 to an orderbook since these orders use an AMM to get executed which means price changes when an order gets executed. There should be a way to (1) see how much order volume at a specific price point (rounded) and (2) a way to see explicit orders at a specific price point. General ""bars"" like on classical orderbooks wouldn't be as helpful.

Reduce amount of tokens for current limit orders by at least 5M tokens since the current version is not really user friendly imo. Also reduce the order limit UI improvements by 5M since it's the UI/UX for a not super important part of the proposal. This would bring it down to 125M max again which is more fair i think. I just don't see limit orders on cpAMMs being an amazing thing as we have seen with deflex on algorand. Also there is no incentive to run the OSed bot which means we rely potentially only on WebDev for limit orders to get executed which is kinda bad. "

---

I appreciate all your feedback, you have been really active in giving feedback 🙏. OSed includes both older and newer smart contracts.

For me limit orders are a really needed feature because you can't be around all the time if you want to swap at a specific price.
About OSed bot not having incentive to run, It will be open source so people can tweak it so it only triggers at a price which ensures them their fee.

For example if order is 10VOI for 20VIA and AMM price goes to 12VOI for 20VIA. They can keep 2VOI as fee.

I am open to change it if other governors think so too that limit orders is not as important feature?

[main nexus]

thats true there are natural incentives because you can keep the difference of limit order price and current price, good point

[tropic fjord]

@ebon dune: There is a lot of work to be done in this proposal, so I’m not very confident that it will be done in a timely manner. I find the award amounts to be incredibly huge. I wish we (the council) had a better way of remembering the size of past awards so we can keep them in line.

What tells you it will not be done in timely manner and what is the time you are thinking of? Why do you think amounts are "incredibly huge" when other proposal with even higher amounts have been passed?

ㅤ

Here are some past proposal that has been passed

• OpenARC72 NFT Marketplace - Shelly ( https://docs.google.com/document/d/10fvCAI82hpifaoSUnWIJvmH_wwVjlcOn )

125,000,000 VIA

• Humble DeFi OpenAMM - HumbleDeFi ( https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VMYIwNrjvjNd8R4mSBNbBe-vm54Yru2WhcFYc5eB3UE )

200,000,000 VIA

• Kibisis Wallet - Agora Labs ( https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vUIO10F4J724UeqJjMWt-_DjNaKgdnB8UZhw2fZqus4 )

150,000,000 VIA

• Block Explorer - D13 ( https://docs.google.com/document/d/1uTobQc-ks2UfyX-lHrFMZJVa7XsAkbUNWacXItkWl7I )

125,000,000 VIA

Why do we think 135M is too much for a DEX ( AMM + Limit Orders ) in our case?

[tropic fjord]

@low temple: Happy with the incorporated feedback, but I would also like to also see a commitment to action any potential audit feedback (which would be done independently of this)

How would you like to do that? Would me just saying be enough and would you believe me?

[ebon dune]

Thank you for the correction

[tropic fjord]

About your comment regarding time what do you think is missing (what was promised in the proposal) from current working app https://voi.nomadex.app other than UI/UX improvements?

[low temple]

Yeah, that would be enough for me!

[tropic fjord]

Yes I am committed to take necessary action to make sure user funds are safe if an audit takes place.

[ebon dune]

I could be being lame, but when I see six items that are quite different from each other (eg, limit order ui, arbitrage bot, and missing features), I get nervous. When I read the list under “solution approach”, I can’t tell what is done and what is part of your new proposal, so it feels like a huge amount for two months

[tropic fjord]

ok, for your information most of the features are already implemented and open sourced, even arbitrage bot is implemented (waiting to open source it when I am happy with it). If everything else can get implemented in short amount of time why would you assume it will not get implemented in that time. This proposal only asks for tokens after things are implemented and open sourced so if I am unable to implement it, tokens are not released.

[safe lantern]

2nd Eval - Nomadex AMM - WebDev.algo - 20240221

[static mortar]

Good job webdev, thanks for changing my mind about this project, I’m excited to see what it turns into. Good luck

[tropic fjord]

In the gov meeting @stray garnet said 1 week is not enough to evaluate open sourced code and he suggested it to be at least 2 weeks. I am ok with it being 2 weeks.

[stray garnet]

I said at least 2 weeks, but please please make it 3 🙂

[tropic fjord]

I think 2 weeks is more than enough to judge if smart contracts are good enough but let's agree on 2.5 weeks or 18 days 🙂

[main nexus]

did you put the 7 days or more into the proposal? i dont see it at this moment

i can only vote on things that are mentioned in the linked proposal

[tropic fjord]

Added this line just now

When code is open sourced there will be a period of 7-18 days during which the committee can check if code is faulty or not what was promised.

[safe lantern]

Passed! - Nomadex AMM - WebDev.algo - 20240221

[tropic fjord]

Hey @tired token

I was expecting these tokens (75M + 15M) to be released after 18 days of open sourcing and code for these has been open sourced something like 22-23 days ago ( #nomadex message ). Are we on the same page here?

• 75M VIA for current implementation of AMM smart contract and web interface. These tokens are released on open sourcing of the relevant code.
• 15M VIA for current Implementation of limit orders. These tokens are released on open sourcing of the relevant code.

[tired token]

A token release request needs to be completed, then signed off on by the council and core team.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1siksabkiMtbQJz3zzXaOdU6Idxwla3otkwh2reSodco/edit#heading=h.4q6t8dvwz9o6

"Proposer informs the council of completion of the proposal."

[tired token]

@tepid violet is in the TRAC role and can get this started. @tough imp will sign off as the council representative who did DD.

[tropic fjord]

Ah ok

[tired token]

Now the token release process begins! 🥳 This is a WIP so please have some patience as we work through this.

[tepid violet]

Sorry for the delay @tropic fjord

I’ll get as much of it as I can done tomorrow. Do you mind if I DM with any questions or missing information?

[tropic fjord]

ok sure

[tepid violet]

@tired token am I right that @tough imp will be verifying the completion and milestones have been met for process 5, and I’ll just be doing the paperwork on that one? (Plus the PAP and TRR)

[tired token]

Yes. As the person who handled DD he is in that role.
If #1209603540050251856 passes then we will be able to assign this task to any council member.

[tepid violet]

Perfect. DId you have a chance to look at my feedback there? (I know you guys are swamped with work at the moment!)

[tired token]

Can you direct link to the feedback to make sure I have read it.
If this is the group chat with Scotty and Shanthi yes.

[tepid violet]

No, on the extended council rewards. Here: #1209603540050251856 message

I'm trying to give feedback during community review. It's embarrassing as I backtrack through all the posts how many have so little.

[tired token]

I will answer these 🙂 thank you for the direct link and the quick response.
I am going for dinner right now so it won’t be for a bit.

[tepid violet]

Posting here for public access
Proposal Token Allocation Plan: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1F6fq3pqzv4mZgUnqwxGY6ohVFnKQgCjmN2k22vqIMZ0/edit?usp=sharing
I am waiting on WebDev's wallet address to finalise it.

@tough imp I know you are doing the Verification Process on this (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AEJoZaYdEbZ2TNISkRWAn89ROYJ3GSvWqHECKsdUCTY/edit?usp=sharing), but who reviewed the code? The proposal passed on the 9th I believe, so 18 days for review gives us until the 27th of March for the first two milestone payments, is that correct? @tropic fjord has referenced a release of code 22-23 days ago. DId the 18 days begin prior to the proposal passing 2nd evaluation?

[tropic fjord]

My understanding was open sourcing the code before resubmitting the proposal so council or anyone have enough time to audit.

[tepid violet]

Yes, I saw that from your comment ❤️

@tough imp and @stray garnet was that your understanding too?

My understanding was that was for council review and it had to be triggered by a token release request, rather than a general public open source request. But I am 1 week into the job so happy to be wrong and would appreciate some guidance 🫂

[tepid violet]

I've given Coop editor access to the Verification Sign Off document for Nomadex to his .voi@gmail account

[tropic fjord]

Does verification require signing from the DD person? This document suggests otherwise Tier-Based Proposal Evaluation Process

[tired token]

I believe the document quite clearly states the DD team handles it. That is Coop.
Can you clarify what is suggested otherwise?

You can also view this for further clarification:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1_3d8K7bO2Kjp-_hSzHDFEqOw3gNlnDsJFDFAje9Aq4I/edit#heading=h.oqcne6wijsy4

[tropic fjord]

Yes but it also says Chair if DD not available.

[tired token]

Yes it does. @tough imp is available to do this, so the chair is not needed.

Unavailable would be he is on vacation, or voted off the council.

[tropic fjord]

Fine

[main nexus]

Coop should respond soon tho

WebDeb shouldnt be waiting for us

[tired token]

Agreed. I don't know where Coop is in the process.

If he doesn't do it, and is available, that would be a failure of council responsibilities.

[tepid violet]

Was he at the gov meeting yesterday? Or is it worth me reaching out on Twitter where he is more active?

[main nexus]

if you have to do this he shouldnt be on the council

he needs to check here and if he doesnt i call a vote to remove him

according to the attendance sheet he was there yesterday

[tepid violet]

I think a little leeway is appropriate given the process is new to everyone. But I dont love feeling like a nag so hopefully he checks in 😂😅

He will have heard it at the meeting which is good.

It’s not fair for it to be holding up WebDev’s payment either.

[main nexus]

does your current implementation fulfill the AMM bounty? where do i create pools then? and are VSA pools supported?

[tropic fjord]

Here you can create an arc200 token https://voi.nomadex.app/tokens
then click arc200 token in the list and there will be a button for creating VOI-ARC200 pool for that token.
If it is an existing arc200 token you can goto voi.nomadex.app/tokens/arc200-{ARC200_ID} and there will be a button for creating a pool.

Yes you can only create VOI-ARC200 pool ATM but the same smart contract with little bit modifications can be made to be VOI-ASA (VSA).

After pool creation, pool creator can set fee and bring pool account online/offline.

[main nexus]

should definitely be improved but good thats its possible

[main nexus]

hmm imho this needs to be implemented before you can get a payout

[tropic fjord]

I respect your opinion but let's see what was token assigned to in the proposal

75M VIA for current implementation of AMM smart contract and web interface. These tokens are released on open sourcing of the relevant code.

15M VIA for current Implementation of limit orders. These tokens are released on open sourcing of the relevant code.

[main nexus]

because you told me that everyhting of the AMM bounty was met

which isnt the case

[tropic fjord]

which point isn't met from the bounty document

[main nexus]

support of ASAs

or VSAs

in this case

"Supports appropriate assets

1. ASAs
2. ARC-200"

https://discord.com/channels/1055863853633785857/1146726708771303444

[tropic fjord]

I don't remember saying that exactly can you point me to that. Can we decide what do we go base of bounty document or the proposal?

[main nexus]

from our DMs

[main nexus]

i see the proposal as a "solution" for the bounty

[tropic fjord]

ah ok.
so let's make it clear you guys have to decide whatever based on what is already done.

[main nexus]

my question is would it be really a big problem to integrate VSAs before a payout can happen?

[tropic fjord]

my answer is I am not putting in anymore of my time into this time eating governance to make it happy. It is already more than 4 months I started working on it.

[tepid violet]

I think the two milestones you have requested pay out for what has already been created, right?

Are you planning to complete the next milestones at some point? And if so, are VOI/VSA and ARC200/VIA pools a part of those as you see them?

[main nexus]

that doesnt sound like you ever want to work on it again tho 😅

[tropic fjord]

Yes 2 milestones requested are for what is already done.

Am I planning on completing the next milestones?
That's up to me and they are to be paid after they are done.

VOI/VSA is not part of the proposal so governance can not ask me about that for token release but If I choose to work on it, that's upto me to decide.

[main nexus]

also it sucks that it took that long but i also dont feel like we are in a rush since we are on testnet

[main nexus]

i would disagree since imo completion of the bounty is necessary

[tropic fjord]

Maybe I will work maybe I will not but I will not be asking governance again that's for sure.

[main nexus]

@tired token tagging so you are aware: so i see this proposal as a completion of the AMM bounty and thats why I think a payout can only happen if the minimum requirements are met

definitely need other opinions here as well

[tired token]

It says right in the proposal that it supports ASAs. I think that it is hard to argue that it shouldn’t be a requirement.
@webdev.algo could you elaborate on why ASAs wouldn’t be part of the solution?

[tepid violet]

Yes of course- I just thought it might help allay lobo’s worries. The future milestones don’t have bearing on the current payment request 🫂

[tropic fjord]

ok point to me the milestone which this falls under?

[tired token]

From my interpretation the first one.
What one do you think it falls under?

[tropic fjord]

Here is the first one

• 75M VIA for current implementation of AMM smart contract and web interface. These tokens are released on open sourcing of the relevant code.

Don't see a word for ASA or VSA in here 🔬

[tired token]

So if your solution involves ASAs, isn’t that relevant code?

[tropic fjord]

"current implementation"

[tired token]

Can you point to other features in your solution approach that aren’t implemented?

I think you are submitting an incomplete solution even though it is current. It puts the token sign off individual in a tough spot. You will need to wait for Coop to weigh in and the core team, as they both have to sign off

[tropic fjord]

• Order Filling Bot: needs more work and not open sourced yet
• volume fluctuations, I was thinking of having a chart for the volume

[tired token]

Looks like these milestones cover it clearly.

[tropic fjord]

yep, but not implemented yet

[stray garnet]

Trying to catch up here

Milestone 1

Number of Tokens: 75,000,000

Purpose: For current implementation of AMM smart contract and web interface.

Category: Infrastructure

Percentage of Total: 55.55%

Release Schedule: These tokens are to be released after code approval, or within 18 days of open sourcing of the relevant code, whichever is sooner.

Additional Notes: None

This is obviously done as long as the code has been open sourced right?

[tired token]

The point raised is what milestone is considered incomplete without implementation on ASAs.
I don’t have an answer, just provided my take, like Lobo. IMO it’s the first one.

[stray garnet]

The milestone is open sourcing the existing code.

If the governance committee wants more than the current features for milestone one it should be requested in the milestone.

[tired token]

So he doesn’t need to fulfill the solution approach because it wasn’t included in the milestones? I think the solution approach carries as much weight as the milestones. They aren’t separate.

[stray garnet]

The milestone is pretty clear

[tired token]

So I guess it falls onto Coop to make the call. I am assuming you will sign off as the core team.

[stray garnet]

75M for the current implementation

[tepid violet]

I think the issue is that part of the solution approach isn’t listed in any of the milestones. Is that right @tired token?

[tired token]

Yeah. It seems like we need a lawyer on the gov council to review these proposals. I missed this and obviously have a different interpretation of the 1st milestone.

We don’t really have a ‘judge’ outside of the council member and core team signoff.

[tepid violet]

Ah, I think other council members assumed it was already integrated/live.

[tired token]

Potentially, I will look back over their evals tomorrow for clues. It will come down to Coop in this situation to have the final say. Quite an interesting case!

[tropic fjord]

@tough imp questioned 75M amount in the 1st eval and here is what I responded with #1209959354682441788 message
This clearifies what 75M was being asked for if governors had actually read it.

[tepid violet]

Jay also asked you about the list in the solutions approach here: #1209959354682441788 message

And you told him that most of that list was already completed.

[tepid violet]

I can absolutely see your point regarding milestone 1 and 2 by the way. They are very clear.

But how and when did you envision fulfilling the overall solutions approach? Or did you move away from that process?

[safe lantern]

I understand why the bounty is being applied to this proposal, but should it?

The tier structure's purpose was to reward payouts based on milestones. The milestone was met.

It would suck not to get "ASA" minting eventually. Changing the funding standard post-passing would be worse.

I am not a governor, but I do not see the problem releasing the tokens as outlined in the proposal.

[tepid violet]

Haha, I’m not a governor either. Should probably pipe down 😂😅

[tropic fjord]

First of all I too expected AMM bounty to be only VOI-ARC200 and missed VSA part. Yes later we moved away from the bounty document and I completely ignored it. Commitee could ask for VSA pools in DD process and I could have created another milestone for that. But now proposal is passed asking that VOI-ASA pools fall under "current implementation" sounds ridiculous to me. Yes I may implement ASA pool but governance committee should not have any say in that and it should totally be upto me.

[tepid violet]

As I understand it the issue is that it’s in the proposal, just not the milestones.

But it might just be a learning experience in terms of care with deciding on milestones 😬🤷‍♀️

nomadex has certainly been used a fair bit during testnet already.

[tough imp]

Friends. I’m still learning this process. I thought once passed my job was complete. It appears I have a large responsibility here. It is middle of night in CA. I will review all of this tomorrow and take appropriate action.

[main nexus]

because i didnt know, i would argue nobody knew, that VSAs arent compatible right now

[main nexus]

in my DMs with him i made always clear that the bounty must be met and i didnt care about the wording just becausse he told me that it already meets the bounty

which is not true as it turns out

and again with it being part of the solution and me seeing it as the completion of a bounty i dont see how the funds can be released

[tropic fjord]

If bounty document is the final words for you let me help you, even if I implement VOI-ASA pool you have stuff to say why it does not fillfill the bounty.

Views -> Network Switch

• Testnet
• Mainnet

Deployed and working on Voi

• Testnet
• Mainnet

Definition of Done

• 99.99% uptime for the duration of testnet

That should have been a no from you regardless of if VOI-ASA pool is implemented.

@main nexus Are you objecting for just VOI-ASA pool or ARC200-ASA, ARC200-ARC200, ASA-ASA pools as well?

[tropic fjord]

Did I misled you that even these requirements were fulfilled?
Was it that easy to mislead a governor who himself did DD?

[main nexus]

in theory i would like to but i acknowledge that it isnt clear in the bounty. it just says support for ASAs and ARC-200 tokens so i dont think that is really possible

[main nexus]

in this case yes because i took your word for it and didnt do my job and checked everything myself

i and other govs also clearly f'ed up

there is definitely the option to say that its our fault and we didnt do our job properly and you should receive your tokens

but i would at least like to see some discussion on the council about it, even if its just talking about how to better word proposals in the future and you getting the tokens

[stray garnet]

Why does a conversation on how to improve the process prevent him from getting his tokens?

They don't have to be connected.

[main nexus]

depends on if we say its our fault and you get your tokens or we say it was clear that its a submission for the completion of a bounty and the "Solution" part of his proposal matters

[stray garnet]

Can someone link me the full version of the latest proposal? I'd like to read through it.

[tired token]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/11-yKPc2g1DHG3XpFjsRJfvbaJaghjmg-NHjJXcQ4Itk/edit?usp=sharing

[stray garnet]

If you believe that the full completion is the completion of the Solution part of the code the rest of the milestones don't matter.

[stray garnet]

I met with the Core Team this morning about this. We believe unanimously that the 75M Milestone was met as written, and if the governance council believes that the delivery should have included more it is on them for approving the document as written. This document arrived at this point because the original proposal didn't have enough milestones and it was discussed that a good comprimise was to reward webdev for what he has already done if he open sourced it. The remainder of the features requested would come after. Webdev completed his side of the agreement. He open sourced the work that he has already completed.

[main nexus]

you might be sadly right but this also means a lot of VIA wasted because basic functionalities are not there which means governors failed hard imo. so we should at least talk about it before anything is decided

[tropic fjord]

I can also say this.
I would like you to declare VIA being given out to governors for their job as wasted because it seems like 13-15 governors did not read the proposal even this proposal went through DD twice and did not know "current implementation" means current implementation and you should also talk about future payout maybe stopped for governers for them not doing their job.

[main nexus]

valid point

its clear that we f'ed up

but i would still argue that its not as easy as you are trying to make it

[tropic fjord]

Hey @tough imp
Were you able to come to a conclusion?

[spare crow]

Was unaware of hold up on the process of marking the 1st milestone complete… really unfortunate & I apologize if there was something I could have done sooner. @stray garnet thanks for bringing this to our attention during the meeting today. @polar citrus thanks for stepping up to make this right, I appreciate the less than ideal situation this has become. @main nexus motion to vote on removing coop made during todays meeting but the other constructive criticism on our failings as the grants council should be on the #🤝community-council-governance-discussion channel (there’s arguments to be made, just not here - I would likely have never seen this had there not been a larger problem)

[tepid violet]

@polar citrus since you are taking over on this for Coop, please let me know if you need access to edit the Verification sign off document here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AEJoZaYdEbZ2TNISkRWAn89ROYJ3GSvWqHECKsdUCTY/edit?usp=sharing

And ping me when it's done so that I can create the Token Release Request ASAP.

[spare crow]

Just following up on this. @tepid violet & @polar citrus … all good?

[tepid violet]

I’ll post here as soon as I have the ok to do the Release form 🫂

[polar citrus]

Hey sorry.. I missed this one. I preferably would abstain from this as they are my direct competitor. My stepping was just in regards to just making sure web dev gets paid and notifying coop. This is just what is needed correct?

[main nexus]

afaik other directors can and should step in if the DD governor is not available

its pretty clear that coop wont do anything

so @wheat isle ?

[tepid violet]

@polar citrus @wheat isle
@irl.algo
Since the person who completed DD is unavailable, I need a director to complete this form: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AEJoZaYdEbZ2TNISkRWAn89ROYJ3GSvWqHECKsdUCTY/edit?usp=sharing

They need to look through the documents that I have attached and the website etc, and verify that the milestones have been completed.

In this case- look at the code that has been Open sourced, and confirm that it is the code for nomadex.

The time to review the code itself expired on the 27th of March and therefore there is no need to check for code quality or bugs found. For the record, I am not aware that this was checked by anyone..

Once the form has been completed I can do the token release form and @tropic fjord can get paid.

[spare crow]

It’s not currently up for a vote. It passed, this is a milestone administrative responsibility -there isn’t anything to abstain from imo… I’d object to idea of it anyways. Hopefully @wheat isle is able to complete the form as I am not a director.

[stray garnet]

This doesn't fit the collaboration value. Even though he is an AMM you should still be supportive. A single AMM isn't as good as two.

[polar citrus]

I agree, I just haven’t been familiar with the proposal largely cause I abstained due to the competitive nature. Tho, if it’s just administrative for a token release I got no problem running it 👍 I thought they were asking to take over DD for coop

[polar citrus]

Got it was confused on the ask 👍 no problem I can roll the administrative process

Once I’m back to comp I’ll roll it

[polar citrus]

Hey Rach, I sent you a DM. I just need access to edit.

I did go through and reviewed the proposal. From a Milestone standpoint it looks like Milestone 1 & 2 were complete. Though I will say, its very limited in information. So I will note the following

Milestone 1: 75M VIA for current implementation of AMM smart contract and web interface... What "current" implementation means to me is that this is just what was made at the time and was just dependent on open source code. From what I can tell, the code is available, though I am not a developer so in terms of full scope, bugs, etc. I cant speak to great degree.

Milestone 2: Again, this falls under "current" implementation. Open source, I believe the proper items are there but again not being a developer its hard for me to digest what is actually there.

The other milestones are not complete and should not be paid out. Unless I am missing it in the documentation, website, or elsewhere.

[polar citrus]

Milestones 1 & 2 signed off @tepid violet @tropic fjord https://docs.google.com/document/d/1mSmG4GmqapvedJoW8w2APRdgqfDwrg4ENsGgyfQSmbY/edit?usp=sharing

[tepid violet]

@polar citrus, I'm just checking, which document have you updated?

This is the one in the folder: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AEJoZaYdEbZ2TNISkRWAn89ROYJ3GSvWqHECKsdUCTY/edit?usp=drive_link

But maybe I gave you permission for something different somehow? Are you comfortable if I copy your comments across?

This is the token release request @stray garnet https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x5GauixJzwtWFUr7LF9oMUBKaBkii-ayP60qTb8EcEc/edit?usp=sharing

@tropic fjord just to keep you in the loop

[polar citrus]

Hey that should be okay, weird two docs 🤔 feel free to copy to the correct one!

[tepid violet]

It was probably me tbh, I did the permissions at my kids swimming lessons so a bit of a juggle 😂

[tepid violet]

@polar citrus or @wheat isle I need a council chairperson/head to sign off on this: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x5GauixJzwtWFUr7LF9oMUBKaBkii-ayP60qTb8EcEc/edit?usp=sharing

and then it is ready for the Foundation to take over the process @stray garnet

[polar citrus]

Will get a signature back later today at the office

[polar citrus]

signed (well it was suggested so you have to confirm)

[tepid violet]

Amazing! Confirmed! @stray garnet this form is ready for you then!

Let me know if you have any questions, but it should all be spelt out in the procedure document I believe.

[stray garnet]

Paid 90M to @tropic fjord G2ZC6VXCO5366QRC2XF623RE5JEXK44CISIEMGIKVOA6ODTI3GICK3UF4U.

[stray garnet]

https://shellyssandbox.xyz/#/token/6779767?address=G2ZC6VXCO5366QRC2XF623RE5JEXK44CISIEMGIKVOA6ODTI3GICK3UF4U

[tropic fjord]

Pushed updates to https://next.nomadex.app/
https://github.com/webdevalgo/NomadexAmmPublic/tree/next

Also open sourced amm-limit order arbitrage bot
https://github.com/webdevalgo/AmmLimitArbBot

These are next milestones

15M VIA for enhancement of limit orders UX so it actually looks like an orderbook dex. Released on open sourcing of the relevant code.

5M VIA for a script or bot which does arbitrage between the AMM and the orderbook. Released on open sourcing of the relevant code.

I request payout for these 🙏

@tepid violet

Also I am close to meeting the requirements for next 2 milestones (12.5m + 12.5m).

Feedback on https://next.nomadex.app/ from governors will be appreciated!
@main nexus

[main nexus]

uhhh this looks way better

[stray garnet]

The dark black on the dark brown is hard to read

[tropic fjord]

which part?

ok yeah, maybe the "balance" "MAX" "Pool balance..." text

[stray garnet]

lol

[tropic fjord]

safari lol?

[stray garnet]

Chrome PC

[tropic fjord]

ok will work on fixing it

[main nexus]

glancing over it my fist impressions

swap tab has all the info it needs imo:
-the suggested swap doesnt get uodated if a swap happens during me being on the webpage or does it?
pool tab is also way better now:
-what kind of APR, trading APR 7d? does it include rewards for participating VOI right now?
-when i have liquidity it should show my position with my added TVL instead of whole TVL of that pool, potentially also the explicit VOI and TOKEN amounts
limit order tab:
-as far as i can see it shows singular orders and doesnt aggregate them in any way which means if they get used more the "orderbook" becomes potentially unreadable which means it doesnt really scale right now

[tropic fjord]

• all balances on the page update when their value change, I will double check if values update if form is filled and a swap happens.
• it's 30days because many pools atm don't have much txns in 7days and this apr calculation rely on txns to the pool, that is why it is using 30 day data instead.
• yes it includes VOI node rewards + trading fees

Appreciate the feedback!

[tropic fjord]

Updated the limit orders page to aggregate orders if their price is almost same.
Also fixed this bug #nomadex message

[tepid violet]

@tropic fjord I've readied the Verification paperwork- are you ready for someone to complete it, or are you still working on integrating feedback?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j5ZzNnwloENlhEVVW5vlsMHjo108pxHQGkDGyS_HV0A/edit?usp=sharing

[tropic fjord]

Looking for feedback on next milestones but these 2 milestones are complete and governance should approve payout for these.

[tepid violet]

Perfect. @polar citrus are you able to Verify these Milestones? (Are you still standing in for Coop?) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j5ZzNnwloENlhEVVW5vlsMHjo108pxHQGkDGyS_HV0A/edit?usp=sharing

[polar citrus]

Sure I’ll take a look later today

[main nexus]

ah nice!

[main nexus]

how would the UI deal with a limit order price of 0.49 or 0.499, would it add the order volume to 0.5?

[tropic fjord]

ATM is is creating separate row for orders if their price is different 0.000001 but that can be changed in code.
I plan to add a dropdown 0.1 0.01 0.001 etc so user can choose how much price range users want to show in same row.

[main nexus]

ah ok. oh the dropdown would be useful

[tropic fjord]

@polar citrus Any update?

[polar citrus]

Hey man didn’t get a chance to test/verify the milestones sorry, am sitting down now to look through

[polar citrus]

@tepid violet this should be signed and good to go.

@tropic fjord

[tropic fjord]

#1209959354682441788 message This is the link @tepid violet shared above for signing.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j5ZzNnwloENlhEVVW5vlsMHjo108pxHQGkDGyS_HV0A/edit?usp=sharing this one does not look signed.

[polar citrus]

She has too approve the comments, I didn’t have editing only suggesting

[tepid violet]

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KhBeUX-OeJFJWPFciNnChYn2rDYdc37jqwbacn18r9w/edit?usp=sharing

@tired token @wheat isle are one of you please able to approve as director?

@tropic fjord FYI ♥️

[tired token]

Complete @tepid violet

[tepid violet]

@tropic fjord this will now be queued for @stray garnet to verify and pay. I believe he is planning to make this on a set day per week, so as to set clear expectations.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KhBeUX-OeJFJWPFciNnChYn2rDYdc37jqwbacn18r9w/edit?usp=sharing

[tropic fjord]

Updated https://next.nomadex.app/ . I think it meets all the criteria for next 2 milestones 12.5M VIA + 12.5M VIA @tired token @main nexus

@main nexus I have added that dropdown above for 0.1, 0.01 on limit orders page. Also made sure swap form update when form is filled in and a swap happens on that pool.

[tepid violet]

Please ping me if everyone is happy for me to start the paperwork on this one ❤️

[tropic fjord]

@tepid violet please do that

[tired token]

Milestone 5
Swap tab:

• price impact✅
• fees needed to pay for this swap
• price of 1 ASSET_B per ASSET_A used in the conversion when swapping from ASSET_A to ASSET_B
• choose from/to asset via a search option (id + name) + list of assets (with assets being in a wallet at the top of the list?)✅
• min receive amount calculated using slippage✅

@tropic fjord
I can't see the fees needed to pay for this swap, it just shows a %
I can't see price of 1 ASSET_B per ASSET_A used in the conversion when swapping from ASSET_A to ASSET_B

Pool tab: ✅

• est. pool APRs✅
• volume, personal liquidity easily visible✅
• search option for pairs✅
• TVL (measured in VOI for testnet if possible)✅
• remove liquidity only visible if you have liquidity in that pool✅

Milestone 6

• People's liquidity should be easily visible and trackable, and it should be easy to swap the tokens people have in their wallet without them having to go through a long list to find them.

I think the pool page is better than it has ever been, but it is not clear that you need to type to see hidden pools. IMO there should be pages implemented(or w/e you think) so that users can view all liquidity if they want. In it's current state the only way to view all liquitidity is by knowing the token names ahead of time.
It would be cool(not necessary) to see a TVL total from every pool that culminates into a nomadex total TVL number.

• ATM it's not clear what is clickable and what not (from/to swap for example), atm it's gray in gray without any color accents or greater differences in color to highlight specific parts of the page which could lead to users not seeing important information✅

I really like this new UI and UX @tropic fjord you have exceeded my expectations and have given Nomadex a premium feel 💪

Feeling tinyman in all the right ways, simplicity and colour changes gradually are fun.

[tired token]

<@&1146847061489225919> please weigh in on this milestone. It specifically calls for:
"Released on open sourcing of the relevant code and when majority governors think that the improvements made were enough."

[main nexus]

yep he did a great job

[rugged peak]

Looks really good to me!

I'm not understanding though, are there hidden pools still? (What an example of one? I'm not familiar with memecoins on Voi.)

The searchbar clearly communicates to me as a first time user that I can search for coins, so no issue there on my end.

Also does Voi allow/require token images. Not to move goalposts in any way, but I DO think token images are a big part of useability/identification for dexes.

[tired token]

Type in Rewards using the search bar for pools.
You can see a list of all pools using the analytics page with a scroll bar

[rugged peak]

I don't see this as an issue though. Very common on any dex I've used. Will be far more common when we have 10,000+ coins.

[tired token]

https://app.uniswap.org/explore/pools

[rugged peak]

At this stage, we could make things more visible, such as listing "Top 100 coins" ranked by volume, market cap, age, or liquidity. With pages for more. (You beat me to it lol)

Currently on mobile and the pool cards are really large rather than a list.

[tired token]

Maybe pages aren't necssary, but 6 is too little IMO.

[rugged peak]

But that said, if I DID want to interact with a non-listed coin I absolutely can search for it.

Another good resource I use a lot is https://dexscreener.com/

Not a dex, but I really like how they sort and list/link to chart/info

[tropic fjord]

Updated
I can't see the fees needed to pay for this swap, it just shows a % ✅
I can't see price of 1 ASSET_B per ASSET_A used in the conversion when swapping from ASSET_A to ASSET_B ✅
IMO there should be pages implemented(or w/e you think) so that users can view all liquidity if they want ✅

[tired token]

You are awesome

[rugged peak]

@tropic fjord if you want to talk sometime in voice chat I'd be more than happy to discuss. Anything we talk about would primarily be extra-curricular to the grant.

[tired token]

You got my vote and signature🫡

[rugged peak]

I also want to add the beauty of requiring open source code is that anyone can pick up where webdev left off and add all kinds of features and competitive advantages. So nit-picking around the goalposts isn't as big of a concern IMO.

Excited to use Nomadex more in the future, awesome product 👍🏻

[tepid violet]

Hi @polar citrus Can I get you to take a look at the above and verify the completion of Milestone 5 and 6 please?

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n4qhFg8PjycN6XWvHwglMDLQ0tcMk_2xM6DoidZNPt0/edit?usp=sharing

[tropic fjord]

@polar citrus These changes were pushed to next branch of this repo.
https://github.com/webdevalgo/NomadexAmmPublic/tree/next

[tropic fjord]

A reminder for @stray garnet 👆

[stray garnet]

I appreciate it, I'll pay this if it is ready after Wednesday this week. I am traveling right now.

[tropic fjord]

Hey @tired token @wheat isle - Can we get this verified that these milestones are complete and signed, so I can move on to next steps? 🙏

[tired token]

Complete @tepid violet

[tropic fjord]

thank you!

[tepid violet]

@tired token and @stray garnet I need a signature on this one still: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GQfR9ynpsox7jT01gqfZurOnXerb62hvd8qGKRqTdW0/edit?usp=sharing

@stray garnet this one is also waiting for your signature: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KhBeUX-OeJFJWPFciNnChYn2rDYdc37jqwbacn18r9w/edit?usp=sharing

[tired token]

@tepid violet I have done my part 🫡

[tepid violet]

Awesome, thankyou!

[stray garnet]

Bost of these have been processed. Thank you! @tropic fjord @tired token @tepid violet

https://voi.observer/explorer/transaction/VXKUIDSVUX623T3EJMJX7TSYF6WY6AI4C2C3UOSSJQTUXEOVR4FQ

https://voi.observer/explorer/transaction/XR564ND5G5DGIM2RQW422W4S52BQQ5ZAESFL23QO5M6YS7MYOQ4A

[tepid violet]

Thankyou!