I'm just running this through Google Translate and figured I might as well copy/paste it here for the rest of you as I go:
(Q) ProfessionalWinter:
Hello, dog. I have some doubts
How did the team involved in the project react to the initial booom the currency had? Did you assume that you would have such a large adhesion, mainly by people who had never messed with DeFi or crypto?
In the roadmap it is planned to launch a new token for that month. How will this affect Reau? Can you provide a little more information about this?
Thank you! Let's go together for the drugs
(A) Caofortavel:
Thanks for the question, ProfessionalWinter.
With surprise. Nobody could predict it - just as nobody could predict (except with that classic "confidence in retrospect") the success of Bitcoin, Amazon, Apple, etc. Before they criticize me, I wouldn't have the arrogance to compare our project with any of them - just our degree of surprise. This is one of the reasons why the analysis of past transactions and operations with the current perspective is always surprising and is even the origin of FUD: how did someone pay 10,000 BTcs (R $ 511.5 million) for a pizza? How did someone buy HOGE for 0.5 ETHs (which today are worth R $ 10 million, but have already been worth> 60 million), etc. I imagine that this type of surprise will become more and more common with the addition of network effect and usecases that we are working hard to bring to our ecosystem.
This is a very important topic of debate at the moment among our team. Our initial idea was to create a classic farm (which is not very complex in terms of technique / code) in order to increase our liquidity and reduce the impact of whales. Liquidity, while not perfect, surprisingly increased a lot even without liquidity mining / farming (it went from 0.5 BNBs to over $ 850,000 in a matter of days), while the farms studied as examples inevitably became pump & dumps that did not seem to be more beneficial to the ecosystem as a whole. In a careful analysis, perhaps PancakeSwap was the only one to remain, but we cannot fail to consider the absurd amount of money injected by Binance in this project. This concern, associated with the difficulty of aligning the tokenomics of a new token to the $ ReAU - which I think is also his fear - remains so far among us all.
Thus, our focus is no longer on creating a new token, but on developing an ecosystem that increases the use of $ ReAU (generating more value for your holders). We intend to make this idea clearer in a next version of our roadmap. This ecosystem comprises the generation of most interesting ideas for everyone, such as a wallet + decentralized exchange (which was already on our roadmap, now with a wallet for tracking income in a more accurate and accessible way) and a marketplace (focusing on I like Brazilians for mercadolivre and other platforms like OLX + our network effect). Naturally, these things take time and that is why we are in the process of hiring new talent (they are too big challenges to be overcome with our small number of volunteers / investors). This is, of course, associated with integrations with partners from different areas, which is also already underway.
(Q) ninjajiraya6:
And your messages in the group of whales / adms, saying when and how to sell? I have already talked with other adm and proved that the conversations are real.
(A) Caofortavel:
Good night, ninja. I came back here just because I assume your concern is honest and not just cheap FUD and so on. I would not like to waste time on this because it does not add anything to the project.
About the print, I will repeat here to make it clear to everyone: people, please do not sell everything at once just like the idiot did over the weekend - we do not have enough liquidity for this type of thing, and this will trigger events of mass selling / panic selling and can hinder the organic growth of this project and scare and alienate inexperienced people in the market, who could benefit a lot from DeFi in their lives.
I sent - and I can continue sending the same message - in public groups, I don't remember whether in pt-br or en-us, because a week ago, if liquidity today is no longer ideal with ~ 800 thousand dollars, in that period liquidity less than $ 50,000 was unable to accept sales greater than 1 ~ 1.5 BNBs, under the risk of a "volatile" price> 20%. Hence my request: please, if you want to reduce your positions in REAU, there is no problem, but I ask you to do it in a more responsible and intelligent way. This same order remains valid: whoever managed to buy a large amount of tokens for a value (today) considered "cheap", please be careful
(Q) rockymc:
I have some questions.
When will the audit be performed to make sure that the token is secure?
Who do I contact to suggest an NGO or social projects for the community to help?
Are there plans to list the token in other DEX?
(A) Caofortavel:
We are already in contact with trusted auditing companies. We could already do with the ETH Authority, for example, but it is our belief that "doing with anyone" is the same as doing nothing. The problems and barriers are: high cost; need to audit contracts that we have not yet launched (which are on our roadmap) and delay these audits.
At the moment, TG moderators are organizing all of this, to be honest, kind of "by hand". This is certainly not ideal, but we don't have enough manpower to reorganize this system right now. Please give us suggestions. There are several problems with the current system, such as: how to ensure that money is being used in a non-malicious manner (without wanting to be cynical, but any easy money attracts people capable of the greatest atrocities, given enough time for that - it is almost a statistical question). In my mind, I dream of a kind of "mongrel finance endowment", in which only the dividends of this "decentralized fund" would be used in social actions. I already have an idea in my head about this, but I'm trying to find a way to make it 100% transparent, so as not to generate more FUD / doubts and so on. before any announcement.
Not oficially. It is possible for anyone to create a pool in other DEXes on their own, if they believe that the trading volume can be more profitable than the possible impermanent loss of the token. We have already received proposals from other DEXes in different blockchains, however, which we certainly do not discard: we have the technical capacity to create bridges if at any time this is necessary and / or beneficial to the project.
(Q) rockymc:
> At the moment, TG moderators are organizing all of this, to be honest, kind of "by hand". This is certainly not ideal, but we don't have enough manpower to reorganize this system right now. Please give us suggestions.
I don't know a good suggestion for that, but maybe a form or a similar system in which a person can submit the suggestion for a social project, like the e-Citizenship portal of the Brazilian Senate where Brazilian citizens can submit suggestions for bills - if not I'm mistaken, the person just needs to log into the system, write a brief summary about the proposal and can expand more about the bill in a more detailed description field.
Today I was reading about DEXs and DeFi and I saw that some tokens and even meodas have a vote-based governance system, where the greater the amount of the currency you have, the greater your voting power. Perhaps a similar system could be adopted in REAU, create a proposition system and each user can vote, for example, on which NGO to help, and the most voted proposal goes for execution. In the beginning it would be done manually, but then you could invent a way to create a smart contract that certifies the execution of the selected proposal.
About fraud, unfortunately it exists everywhere, just having a team with strict criteria to select the projects to ensure that they are not scams.
(Q) giulio_watts:
Good Morning!
Any prediction of when the white paper will come out?
(A) Caofortavel:
Good afternoon, giulio_watts and happy easter.
First of all, I would just like to explain why we don't spit out any paper to the public as soon as possible, as many are hoping: we are in an internal discussion about how technical and how accessible this whitepaper should be. Should we direct it to the Brazilian lay public, who is still unable to do their own due diligence (DYOR), or should we direct it to the technical / usually foreign public that also needs to have their questions answered, such as: what are our plans? Why is a reflective token different here in Brazil? What is the Brazilian cultural context that allowed the adoption of an alternative to the real in this very interesting way here in the country? Among others.
At the moment, I have a draft of about 20 pages, which mix more didactic texts and more philosophical / theoretical texts that talk about the importance of this project and about tokenomics and so on. Our role is to try to distill this in a way that is palatable to the Brazilian people and also tasty to foreign investors who are looking at a completely new audience in DeFi. That's why our (relative) delay. I say relative, because in v1 of the roadmap the deadline is "in April" and we have not made any promises, officially, in addition. It is clear that, due to communication errors, someone may have given some date or certainty not so sure, but that is the situation of the whitepaper.
One of our ideas, even, to advance, is perhaps to divide the whitepaper into a "reaupaper", more didactic and accessible, and in a classic whitepaper, with a more academic tone. To be honest, due to my academic record (I am a published scientist, etc.), I would much rather just write something technical and dry and send it on. There is, however, this Brazilian cultural context and our educational objective behind it all, so I was convinced that vomiting a lot of technicality and just writing the business in English "and it did" would not be very interesting for our project and not so much in agreement with our long-term goals.
(Q) vinivst:
Do you have open positions for the dev team? How do I get more information about this?
(A) Caofortavel:
Yes, we are actively looking for volunteers and are even willing to hire new developers to proceed with our projects. Please send an email to [career@viralata.finance](mailto:career@viralata.finance) or [careers@viralata.finance](mailto:careers@viralata.finance) and we have people filtering and analyzing resumes there.
Our long-term objective would be to transform this project into a "decentralized social company". It will be very difficult, but it would certainly be a dream. Perhaps we will become a kind of decentralized "social bank" based on smart contracts and with a% destined to social activities, governed by a DAO. This is certainly beyond my technical skills, but it is what we have been discussing internally and I believe it would be the ideal path for the project.
(Q) Depth-Dull:
Goodnight!
I would like to know how involved the devs are in relation to the moderation of the Telegram groups and whether you agree with the moderators' attitudes to restrict / ban important issues for those who really believe in the project in favor of "preventing currency devaluation" or how have they even said "control the panic"?
I believe in the project but more and more the moderation team seems to be interested in reaching an audience similar to pyramid project investors, it is sad to see that the main communication channel of the project is more concerned with capital retention than a discussion about the project, even if it generates negative conclusions.
(A) Caofortavel:
Depth, I will answer only you before I leave: I have not been following, particularly, the movement of the tgs since we reached ~ 5000 members. It is a job of the dog what the moderators are doing, and I am very grateful for the patience of all of them. My view is that reddit is perhaps a better long-term option for managing an exponentially growing community, you know? I have always said this, in fact: the telegram will not be manageable or tolerable from the 5000 members.
I'm not sure what the moderators' attitudes are and I apologize if they made a bad impression on you or new investors. It certainly wasn't the case while I was watching. The truth is that it is no longer viable to control such a large community - and I cannot even expect such a deal from them.
While they may seem authoritarian, I have already received hundreds of attempts to beat innocent people who were only allowed because of that community. We had to try to take down and report a website that bought a domain similar to ours to try to steal money from people. Three or four copied tokens appeared in order to deceive the unsuspecting / beginners, all of them with intense FUD campaigns and so on (and all this before 5,000 members, I can only imagine now!). Perhaps it is time to list cost x benefit and think about what is ideal and what is possible.
Ideally, keeping the community with healthy and open discussions at all times is almost impossible.
The possible thing may be to migrate slowly to reddit, or to divide the tg communities into smaller groups.
I am really on hand to hear better suggestions, but it seems to me to be the path of all the big crypto / tokens communities like ours (see hoge, dogecoin, etc.).
Caofortavel:
To all who asked questions: thank you very much! I unfortunately can't type anymore for today because of tendonitis (it sucks). I hope we can do more sessions like this here on reddit more often, maybe week by week?
Have a great Easter and please help us in the growth of this dog community: threads for beginners, memes, threads of ideas and suggestions are always welcome and can be useful for the project as a whole.
The value of the token is nothing more than the strength of our pack :)
No comments:
Post a Comment