|
Network
|
Proposal ID
|
Proposal
|
Explorer Link
|
Vote
|
Reason
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Osmosis | 535 | Lengthen Thirdening and restore Thirdening impact | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 534 | Implement Halvening, new Emission Ratios and Reduce Superfluid Discount rate | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 533 | Supercharged Incentives Model | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 532 | Supercharged Liquidity Pools Rollout | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 531 | Reset Community Pool allocation to 0 | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 530 | Introduce a Protocol Taker Fee for Osmosis swaps | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 529 | Regular Incentive adjustment for 2023-06-12 | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 528 | Decide What's Shown on the Main Osmosis Website | Link | No | We believe that on-chain governance should not and cannot dictate what frontend looks like. First, the appeal of web3 is that we all share the same database (the public ledger) while developers can permissionly innovate on frontend. If one frontend does not meet the user needs, it will be competed away by a better frontend. When users have diverse UI preferences, multiple frontends will emerge to meet the user needs. Second, because frontend is hosted off-chain, there is no meaningful way to enforce the governance decision on dev teams. It is social consensus all the way down. Therefore, such abstract proposal less effective than voting on specific tokens to be added through governance to signal the social consensus to various frontend teams. |
| Osmosis | 527 | Upload Suitdrop Redeem Contract | Link | Yes | LFG! |
| Osmosis | 526 | Allow Squid contracts to be uploaded | Link | Yes | LFG! |