0x9953469d6a0040cdae0ee897ea5a3e69826810248aaee95202a926bf4673600b
Transaction
+$15.18
[SEND]
-$370.50
| Address | Token(s) swapped | Balance | Price | Value change | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ETH | +$15.18 | ||||
| Ether | +0.0061828426 | +$15.18 | |||
| [SEND] | ETH | -$370.50 | |||
| Ether | -0.15086128 | -$370.50 |
- 0CALL4617563 gas [RECV] ZoraNFTCreatorProxy.createEdition (name=Arctika, symbol=$LIBRA, editionSize=18446744073709551615, royaltyBPS=500, fundsRecipient=[SEND] web3sc.eth, defaultAdmin=[SEND] web3sc.eth, saleConfig=[7 elements], description=Team Arctika\n\nThe most powerful nuclear icebreaker in the world was the Soviet Arctika. It was the first surface ship to reach the North Pole in 1977. When you need to break some ice, send in the team.\n\nTL;DR\n\nA team wants to form to break an impasse.\n\nThis team dissolves after a work product is complete.\n\nThe product is: A well-reasoned and best-in-class strategy recommendation for the network parameters for the upcoming V6 hard fork.\n\nWhat brings us here?\n\nThe community stands on the cusp of launching the critical v.6 hard fork – all tech work done but governance issues remain.\nThe issues are multiple, inter-related, and important for the long term sustainability of the project and the perceptions of the project in the market. People have tried sorting these in ad-hoc community meetups, with little success. The community is frustrated and there is a strong sentiment that leadership is needed.\n\nWhat's the Problem Definition?\n\nWe don't have a numerical parameter for the coin split for V6 genesis. On the surface the problem is defining who pays for the Infrastructure Escrow. This has many ramifications on capital structure, and ultimately strategies that are available now and into the future. Making a \"good decision\" requires scholarship in blockchain, economics, and 0L's values.\n\nWhat does an acceptable work product look like?\n\nOne document, clearly readable for readers of english as a second language. The document is a defensible recommendation for the parameters. The recommendation is framed to enable the community to cast a yes/no vote\n\nWhat's the greater opportunity?\n\nThis is an opportunity to exemplify 0L's vision, mission, and values - \"walk the walk\". The outcome could be a canonical document which serves as a touchstone for our community, and maybe others.\n\nIs there a future utility to this work product?\n\nBesides helping to make a current decision, we hope that the document produced will also establish a template and model for future difficult decision making.\n\nIs this binding?\n\nThis team has no formal authority on anything. Only leadership.\nOnce the recommendation is made, the community will discuss and vote. If the community ratifies the recommendation, it will signal to the V6 genesis validators what parameters to enter at genesis. If the community does not accept the recommendation, this team will dissolve and the community will need to decide what happens next.\n\n\nHow will you choose the members of this team?\n\nThe team will include both Authors and Reviewers.\n\nSeven Authors have committed to being involved, including Zaki, 0D, Lex, Wade, Daniyal, AT., and ricoflan. \n\nThe following criteria were used to select the Authors:\n\nThey must have produced work products for 0L\nWe need to represent a diverse group of stakeholders (e.g., a mix of OGs, community leads, subject matter experts, and validator operators)\nThey must be respected voices in the community\nThey must have exhibited good alignment with our project values\nThey must have experience in other blockchains\n\nReviewers are encouraged to join and will be asked to review the recommendations before they are shared with the community at large. We expect reviewers to meet the following criteria:\n\nBe familiar with the 0L Canonical Documents\nBe mission and values aligned with the project\nBe timely and responsive to review requests\nAttendance in Governance WG meetups\n\nIs this a permanent team?\n\nNo, this is a team convened to solve a problem and help make decisions that we view as critical to shaping the future of the project\n\nHow does this connect to other \"governance\" events?\n\nWe will honor previous governance signals. A community vote in October 2022 approved stopping inflation and revising project economics. The proposals were fairly high level and left implementation details TBD. Among those details was the “infrastructure escrow fund” - a new pool for paying future validator rewards (and maybe more?). What may seem like a small detail on what percentage of the infrastructure escrow comes from which stakeholders, has deep and ramified consequences on capital.\n\nWhy is this taking so long?\n\nReaching those implementation details took far longer than envisioned and, now, as we have taken this up with the community we have found division on multiple issues, moreover, there is an argument that circumstances have changed to an extent that perhaps some of the right questions have changed.\n\nWhat's the timeline?\n\nTwo Weeks. It's going to be hardcore work.\n\nWhat’s our proposed work process?\n\nA limited set of high level discussions, coupled with working asynch on reviewing a draft recommendation document. In a perfect world, this is a two meeting venture – a first kick off meeting and preliminary discussion, then a final meeting to review the draft recommendation. This is flexible, but the idea is to keep the lift light for everyone and be respectful of everyone’s time.\n\nWhat are we not going to do?\n\nWe’re not developing (or designing) a long term governance solution. This is a temporary body focused on a specific challenge the community confronts at a crucial moment. This is not an unscoped exploration of the social science of governance, nor is it an attempt to write a white paper for public consumption. This is a focused, bounded internal strategy exercise.\n\nWhere to learn more?\n\n0L Canonical Docs:https://0l.network/category/canonical/ \n0L Constitution: https://handbook.0l.network/index.php?title=0L_Network_Constitution , animationURI=ipfs://bafkreifmjda4w4c4kdsd3fqw6wrmmxok4uvnga2j4sfyr7ygdmujsj4ynm, imageURI=ipfs://bafkreialaemsr3ohknmiwb736lhabgtnsmc3uy4h5gptdtbcvmo6noe4me) ( ERC721DropProxy)
- 1
- 2DELEGATECALL4611380 gas ZoraNFTCreatorV1.createEdition (name=Arctika, symbol=$LIBRA, editionSize=18446744073709551615, royaltyBPS=500, fundsRecipient=[SEND] web3sc.eth, defaultAdmin=[SEND] web3sc.eth, saleConfig=[7 elements], description=Team Arctika\n\nThe most powerful nuclear icebreaker in the world was the Soviet Arctika. It was the first surface ship to reach the North Pole in 1977. When you need to break some ice, send in the team.\n\nTL;DR\n\nA team wants to form to break an impasse.\n\nThis team dissolves after a work product is complete.\n\nThe product is: A well-reasoned and best-in-class strategy recommendation for the network parameters for the upcoming V6 hard fork.\n\nWhat brings us here?\n\nThe community stands on the cusp of launching the critical v.6 hard fork – all tech work done but governance issues remain.\nThe issues are multiple, inter-related, and important for the long term sustainability of the project and the perceptions of the project in the market. People have tried sorting these in ad-hoc community meetups, with little success. The community is frustrated and there is a strong sentiment that leadership is needed.\n\nWhat's the Problem Definition?\n\nWe don't have a numerical parameter for the coin split for V6 genesis. On the surface the problem is defining who pays for the Infrastructure Escrow. This has many ramifications on capital structure, and ultimately strategies that are available now and into the future. Making a \"good decision\" requires scholarship in blockchain, economics, and 0L's values.\n\nWhat does an acceptable work product look like?\n\nOne document, clearly readable for readers of english as a second language. The document is a defensible recommendation for the parameters. The recommendation is framed to enable the community to cast a yes/no vote\n\nWhat's the greater opportunity?\n\nThis is an opportunity to exemplify 0L's vision, mission, and values - \"walk the walk\". The outcome could be a canonical document which serves as a touchstone for our community, and maybe others.\n\nIs there a future utility to this work product?\n\nBesides helping to make a current decision, we hope that the document produced will also establish a template and model for future difficult decision making.\n\nIs this binding?\n\nThis team has no formal authority on anything. Only leadership.\nOnce the recommendation is made, the community will discuss and vote. If the community ratifies the recommendation, it will signal to the V6 genesis validators what parameters to enter at genesis. If the community does not accept the recommendation, this team will dissolve and the community will need to decide what happens next.\n\n\nHow will you choose the members of this team?\n\nThe team will include both Authors and Reviewers.\n\nSeven Authors have committed to being involved, including Zaki, 0D, Lex, Wade, Daniyal, AT., and ricoflan. \n\nThe following criteria were used to select the Authors:\n\nThey must have produced work products for 0L\nWe need to represent a diverse group of stakeholders (e.g., a mix of OGs, community leads, subject matter experts, and validator operators)\nThey must be respected voices in the community\nThey must have exhibited good alignment with our project values\nThey must have experience in other blockchains\n\nReviewers are encouraged to join and will be asked to review the recommendations before they are shared with the community at large. We expect reviewers to meet the following criteria:\n\nBe familiar with the 0L Canonical Documents\nBe mission and values aligned with the project\nBe timely and responsive to review requests\nAttendance in Governance WG meetups\n\nIs this a permanent team?\n\nNo, this is a team convened to solve a problem and help make decisions that we view as critical to shaping the future of the project\n\nHow does this connect to other \"governance\" events?\n\nWe will honor previous governance signals. A community vote in October 2022 approved stopping inflation and revising project economics. The proposals were fairly high level and left implementation details TBD. Among those details was the “infrastructure escrow fund” - a new pool for paying future validator rewards (and maybe more?). What may seem like a small detail on what percentage of the infrastructure escrow comes from which stakeholders, has deep and ramified consequences on capital.\n\nWhy is this taking so long?\n\nReaching those implementation details took far longer than envisioned and, now, as we have taken this up with the community we have found division on multiple issues, moreover, there is an argument that circumstances have changed to an extent that perhaps some of the right questions have changed.\n\nWhat's the timeline?\n\nTwo Weeks. It's going to be hardcore work.\n\nWhat’s our proposed work process?\n\nA limited set of high level discussions, coupled with working asynch on reviewing a draft recommendation document. In a perfect world, this is a two meeting venture – a first kick off meeting and preliminary discussion, then a final meeting to review the draft recommendation. This is flexible, but the idea is to keep the lift light for everyone and be respectful of everyone’s time.\n\nWhat are we not going to do?\n\nWe’re not developing (or designing) a long term governance solution. This is a temporary body focused on a specific challenge the community confronts at a crucial moment. This is not an unscoped exploration of the social science of governance, nor is it an attempt to write a white paper for public consumption. This is a focused, bounded internal strategy exercise.\n\nWhere to learn more?\n\n0L Canonical Docs:https://0l.network/category/canonical/ \n0L Constitution: https://handbook.0l.network/index.php?title=0L_Network_Constitution , animationURI=ipfs://bafkreifmjda4w4c4kdsd3fqw6wrmmxok4uvnga2j4sfyr7ygdmujsj4ynm, imageURI=ipfs://bafkreialaemsr3ohknmiwb736lhabgtnsmc3uy4h5gptdtbcvmo6noe4me) ( ERC721DropProxy)
-