Community tools for Crypto Unicorns

[ArtToRich]

Well done!
Finally something of real value.

[Choakz]

I have some reservations with the RBW put into this tools. I acknowledge the value of the tools we need for the game, however, I think this would be a bit too much long-term wise. CU is still under the radar, but once this enters the main stream of play and earn games more groups will develop their own version of tools. Just like in Axie, where you also have freak’s extension, axie.zone, and axie world among others. And most if not all of them developed their tools without cost. (some have donation addresses like axie.zone)

While at start this may be something valuable as you’d be the first to create this, but I see no growth or sustain in value once other players/groups create their own versions you’d have ‘competition’ and in a free market, competition drives prices down. IMHO when this comes to fruition, you’d be pressured to maintain your tools and even upgrade them to be relevant to the community even without the funds backed by this DAO. People would look for the ‘better’ tools provider and wouldn’t want to ‘pay’ for something that they can get for free even if it’s a different type/version than what you are currently developing.

I’m not quite comfortable with the amount that will be put into this tools, especially looking at the proposal, 2k rbw/month for 1 year is just for Unitinder and gene-viewing browser extension. May we know how you came up with this value?

[gamelabs]

Hey UniFam!

1. The last day of the Temperature check poll was quite tough as we faced some sudden growth of votes against our proposal and drop of approval rate from 81% to 46% in 2 hours but saw no consistent arguments here or in Discord.

2. That was really confusing and thanks to the governance team investigation later the multi-account sign-up attack was revealed:

@lgManicUnicorn

Since yesterday, June 2, 2022, 07:00 UTC or June 2, 2022, 02:00 PST, our governance forum has been subject to sign-up attacks. Our investigation into the initial attack led to the following results:

• Some of these accounts are owned by the same people.
• These accounts are all coming from the same location based on the geolocal data.
• All of the accounts have <1 minute reading time.
• All of the accounts have only 1 topic viewed.
• The majority of the accounts voted on an ongoing temperature check for Gamelab’s Community Tool draft proposal despite having the following account stats: less than 1 minute of reading time, 1 topic viewed, trust level 0, and new account status.

3. Thanks to the LG governance team (again) this was fixed by removing fake accounts from voting but the attacks continued throughout the day:

@lgManicUnicorn

While we have deleted the accounts from the initial attack, the attack persists.

4. Thus we fully support the governance team decision to move poll to KS as it seems to be more sustainable. Still we are very frustrated that this kind of situation could happen again but we are sure that LG team and @lgManicUnicorn will do their best in order to keep it clear. We also want to address those who conceived the sign-up attacks yesterday:

Governance building is a difficult process and we are always up here and in Discord to discuss our proposal (just like we’re doing for almost 2 months now), let’s do it in a civilized way, w/o undermining the values and infrastructure of CU DAO and playing dirty!

[gamelabs]

We are also happy to respond to the latest comments left by @Maxbrand99 and @Choakz - pls find them below. And please do not hesitate to ask any additional questions if something is not clear!

@Maxbrand99: image one is chillaxie/axie.tech breeding calculator

1. We can’t get what you are trying to say by enclosing screenshots from axie.tech/axie.zone. Yep these are the tools for Axie and we are building for Crypto Unicorns. Of course there might be some visual similarities between those tools and Unitinder because actually Axie and CU both have breeding as a game mechanics!
   So what do you actually wanted to say by that there are some similarities between breeding tools for different games?

2. As you might know, axie.tech is an official tooling partner of Axie Infinity. Can you prove that they don’t get anything in reward for their services?

@Maxbrand99 : you have already built this tool for axie, there is no development needed. Just reskining and changing a little bit of logic

The concept of Unitinder has nothing to do with our tools for axie. We are building everything from scratch. To be honest, the “there-is-no-development-needed” allegation looks kinda offensive for our team. You seem to appeal too much to axie experience while we have already pointed out what’s the difference in the proposal:

@gamelabs

Q: And what makes CU different from Axie that makes you ask for a relevant sum of amounts compared to dropping the tools and do a subscription terms for the users?
A: We believe the situtation is different from Axie. We did initially build the tools for Axie for free that was a great example of organic growth but also limited our possibilities to develop all the needed features and affected the quality of the product. Then we built some pro features with a paywall so willing players could get additional value for $SLP. Still that contributions were not enough to enhance UX for our free community tools. Now we are involved in an outstanding gaming ecosystem (it doesn`t even sound fair to compare CU with Pegaxy or Axie) and we want to contribute to it in an outstanding way - building free superb tools that no other game has.

Thus we believe it is absolutely incorrect to compare what/how we are doing for CU with anything done for axies. We are proposing to make a high-quality product for the game our team really likes (and invested in). We believe this will help much both the existing community and upcoming players! We could have proceeded with building low-quality tools or setting up a paywall, but the question here is not only what to do, but also how to do!

@Maxbrand99: I think it needs to be opensource the second its approved… if its approved. The community deserves to be able to see the progress you are making on it.

There is absolutely no problem for us to go opensource once and if the proposal is approved.

@Choakz

Just like in Axie, where you also have freak’s extension, axie.zone, and axie world among others.

Hi ser! We have already pointed out what’s the difference here from axie case in the FAQ to the proposal, you can just check it above in our reply to Max.

@Choakz

IMHO when this comes to fruition, you’d be pressured to maintain your tools and even upgrade them to be relevant to the community even without the funds backed by this DAO

We see no problem in this scenario because our team is sure to do its best disregarding the circumstances. Btw competition is always good but we are standing for complementarity so there’d better be different devs making different tools!

@Choakz

May we know how you came up with this value?

Sure, copying the same question from our FAQ:

@gamelabs

Q: Can you justify the amount you’re asking for the tools?
A: There is a team of 5 professionals who will be working on development and maintenance of the project: designer, frontend and backend devs, QA engineer and PM. Each of them is supposed to be rewarded from a grant amount proposed. Yet our main point is to make a high-quality product so this would require some extra efforts put by the team.

[gamelabs]

just bumping our FAQ for @Maxbrand99, @Choakz and other community members who joined the discussion recently

[Maxbrand99]

@gamelabs

As you might know, axie.tech is an official tooling partner of Axie Infinity. Can you prove that they don’t get anything in reward for their services?

Axie.tech had their tools a very long time before they were official partners

[WarriorMushmellow]

That’s why they need to start with low quality tools?

[Choakz]

@gamelabs

Q: Can you justify the amount you’re asking for the tools?
A: There is a team of 5 professionals who will be working on development and maintenance of the project: designer, frontend and backend devs, QA engineer and PM. Each of them is supposed to be rewarded from a grant amount proposed. Yet our main point is to make a high-quality product so this would require some extra efforts put by the team.

My question is hm is would go to this and that and how did you come up with the number. Will you be purchasing something to make it more premium? What was your reference or did you just go ‘I feel that this much is supposed to be this much so let’s charge this much’? The reason I’m asking is because this is just milestone 1 and there are still other developments to be done based on your proposal. Approval of this first milestone would be a precedent to how much would those cost in the future.

[gamelabs]

@Choakz

My question is hm is would go to this and that and how did you come up with the number

We were mostly referencing to the costs previously approved within the Ecosystem Grants Round 1. For instance, there is a 2K RBW/mo cost of maintaining dune dashboards by Carson Brown. We evaluated the reward for our team’s effort to be close to this. You can check the specific thread for more details: Ecosystem Grants - Round 1 [PASS] - Live Proposals - Crypto Unicorns.

[Wikdst]

Ideally these tools would be developed by the community and funded by success in the game - the developer would be rewarded by their increasing value of unicorns and other assets. If we think that will take to long or not happen, we should pay people to do it. I’m not sure we are at that point yet. Furthermore, the focus on breeding matching seems like a simple improvement to the existing interfaces inside the game. If the developers believe people will benefit from that transparency and matching, wouldn’t it be best in game?