Andre Cronje - infinite AMA

#63

Why do you spend your time creating schemes to take money from hard working people, then consistently play the victim?

2 Likes
#64

That’s the type of unnecessary questions/comments. Please let’s stay focus on the tech side, adoption, usage…

2 Likes
#66

Apparently Tomb doesn’t operate as an algorithmically pegged stable coin anymore, the devs say that it never truly fit the description. They always planned to evolve with utilities, which was written in the docs from the beginning. The devs have given it some utility through Felix exchange (FTM native CEX) and TombChain (the aforementioned L2). Felix exchange offers trading fee discounts for big tomb holders at varying degrees, while Tomb functions as gas on TombChain. TombChain is permissioned, theoretically providing a safe space for investors who don’t want to worry about being scammed by anonymous devs. Tomb still uses a 1.01:1 ratio to FTM as a method of expansion through Tshares, but they aim to have a much higher price than FTM in the long run.

I’m not shilling it i’m just describing the changes in detail incase you haven’t had the time to look into it. Tbh I’m a little skeptical about it, but with Harry’s personal networking and knack for marketing do you see potential for this ecosystem to be beneficial for FTM? They somehow managed over 1 billion in tvl at the end of the last bull run with zero utility lol

3 Likes
#71

Hi Andre

What are your thoughts on Paintswap?

3 Likes
#73

Hey Andre. No questions from me, but thanks for this thread. Super helpful. Ignore the rude people here. Hope you expected some salty comments from idiots, regardless, I believe in your vision and it’s why I invested in the first place. I invested before you left but after seeing interviews with Michael Kong and the team I felt you hadn’t left and even if you did that the vision was still there. I believe in this team and very excited for the future. I wish I knew how to work on a project like this otherwise I would ask to be a part of it. I’m a software engineer myself but haven’t worked in crypto but pretty interested in the code and how it functions. I follow the github and check the updates often and there was always work being done. I hope the vision holds true and this can be a top crypto and eventually fully decentralized. Actually speaking of, I do have a question. Do you think lowering the threshold for being a validator would be helpful to the decentralization of the project and allow more validators on the network?

3 Likes
#75

I think Andre has been fairly honest about the situations. Sorry if you lost money and yeah it sucks but I personally believe he’s more about furthering the tech than lining his own pockets. Better to be known for creating something revolutionary than be known for scamming people like SBF. If you can’t further the AMA productively than just leave so we can learn good information. Very few teams do anything like this.

4 Likes
#78

So here he is essentially saying that if it was never revealed that Sifu worked at wonderland he would have been totally okay with the several extremely nefarious practices happening behind the scenes at wonderland which to this day is debasing its token while offloading its treasury balance into unknown wallets who are part of multi-signature transactions with known members of the development team.

He’s unwilling to acknowledge that he created and did not test the code that ended up ridding people of their lives savings, but is willing to call the project a success since a completely different group of developers managed to maintain it on a completely separate blockchain.

He will only be speaking at Quantum Miami for cash. He doesn’t care about one of the largest projects on Fantom hosting a conference, its about accruing more wealth for the founders.

2 Likes
#79

Truth be told, it wasn’t related to SBF at all, our reason for not wanting to continue to engage was simply their predatory methods, they simply wanted tokens to farm and dump Fantom projects, so after we discovered this, we no longer wanted to support that behavior as we found it damaging to our ecosystem.

2 Likes
#80
  1. To my knowledge, yes, Barek and team are still trying to push forward, they’ve shifted focus to mostly educating first, as a lot of what projects back then wanted to achieve simply wasn’t viable. Lessons; patience and first educate before you try to build, going slow is key with institutions
  2. None that come to mind currently, but I do believe a lot of use cases that previously “failed” due to tech constraints, will become viable in the future
  3. Still one of my favorite projects (and hobbies), I would love to evolve it further one day, sadly time is the constraint and there are more important items to push forward, it makes me incredibly happy knowing others are progressing it.
4 Likes
#81
  1. I don’t expect the team to balloon, I’m happy with our current staffing, we need another ~5-10 people in marketing & BD, and another 5-10 people in core dev, then I’ll be happy, more doesn’t equal better.
  2. In terms of runway, I think our current burn is a in a good place, probably another ~$1m or so max, but less is always better.
  3. 33% is stored on FTM, 33% on ETH, and 33% offchain. Some risk diversification is required, even at 33% that still gives us a decade+ at current burn rates.
4 Likes
#82
  1. We labelled all our addresses on Ethereum and Fantom, so you can confirm ~%50 of the funds there, about ~10% are on exchanges, and ~%40 are off-chain, we are having management accounts audited to publish, we want to publish those quarterly, but currently there is no way to confirm those, all the on-chain values can be verified oncourse by using the Fantom label on etherscan and ftmscan.
  2. We are still in contact, but the communication is very brief
  3. This is in no way a reflection of safety, please know everything is always high risk, but some protocols we use include; curve, convex, geist, spookyswap, beets, and multichain.
4 Likes
#83
  1. FIAT to Crypto is not our expertise, so that is not on our roadmap
  2. While I agree with this sentiment, the UX layer is not something we are focused on, we are the base layer, so our focus needs to be on base layer improvements, user UX is the domain for those building ontop of us, just like “the internet” doesn’t cater for users, but webapps do
3 Likes
#84

While I can see you aren’t here to be constructive, I will answer none the less;

I have never had financial incentive, nor have I received financial benefit from any project I’ve launched, 0 token allocation in Yearn, Keep3r, or Solidly. I also don’t see how any of those projects were “schemes to take money from hard working people”, Yearn was successful and still today is one of the top yield aggregators with an amazing team, Keep3r is still one of the primary devops automation platforms, and Solidly is still thriving via numerous forks.

Can you provide an example of your claims where a product was designed specifically to extract value and where I extracted value?

6 Likes
#85

Very impressed by the team and what they are building and continue to build. Not a personal fan of the UX, but I think what they have accomplished and are accomplishing is amazing.

2 Likes
#86

Great thread, would definitely support the idea to grow the marketing side of Fantom. Don’t you think mouth to mouth viral marketing on fantom would go great with the technology being superior to anything else, hats off to Simone for everything he’s done in the past, massive kudos to the team.

You’re a titan in the industry don’t let anyone bring you down or upset you Andre keep the genius builds coming!

2 Likes
#87

Good luck on your journey, yes, I believe validator stake should be lower, 0 ideally, since it increases validator distribution. As the technology becomes more robust the team systematically decrease requirements for this very reason.

3 Likes
#89

Hi Andre, very happy to see you doing this AMA and providing valuable insights. Appreciate it.

Any changes w.r.t validators planned?

  1. Increasing number of validators, first of all I don’t know if we need more nodes.
  2. Delegating foundation stake to multiple validators to encourage new validators
  3. Currently top 10 validators control most of the power, any way to solve it?
  4. Only 48% of supply staked, room to improve on it?
  5. There some blockchains doesn’t do slashing, do you think Fantom can move away from it?
  6. Anything else planned for validators?
2 Likes
#91

Again, fairly clear discussion won’t be fruitful, but I will answer nonetheless;

I was never involved with Wonderland, nor aware of the practices, when it was revealed I immediately distanced myself from association with Danielle, I did not even know / interact with Sifu or Wonderland. Not sure how I can be blamed by proxy for knowing one of their team members.

I am not a paid speaker, I am receiving 0 financial benefit from attending Quantum Miami. Please refrain from baseless allegation. I’m sorry if you suffered financial losses, but this isn’t productive.

6 Likes
#93
  1. The goal is more, but this isn’t something we control, as we lower validator requirements these will increase
  2. Foundation does delegate to multiple validators and will continue to do so
  3. We want to introduce validator caps, to limit this consolidation
  4. Not something we control unfortunately
  5. Slashing is a requirement, without it you will have more malicious behavior
  6. Nothing that currently comes to mind
7 Likes
#94

Hi Andre,
I apricate you to working on defi. I am a fan of you even if i did’t made any money with your projects, also i lost :slight_smile:

The question is about Solid. I did’t move from fantom cuz of this twit https://twitter.com/solidlyexchange/status/1567224723964141568?s=20&t=SpdeyoQYc34CNI9jNIVuZg
I know you can’t update the code or something like that. Do you or foundation thinking a new project airdrop to the holders or etc.

3 Likes