Just claimed my $LYTH airdrop on @monolythium — the token launcher for Cosmos. ATOM stakers are eligible!
monohub.xyz/atom-holders-a…
English
Andrea Sassanelli
85 posts
Andrea Sassanelli
@andsassa
Blockchain enthusiast and operator @crosnest_com co-founder
EU Katılım Mart 2017
95 Takip Edilen19 Takipçiler
@Freyja_Fenris @razielleonhart @internetarchive Too late, now I'm very angry. I had to change my luggage code.
English
Andrea Sassanelli retweetledi
#cosmonauts, it's time to meet your validators!
they're the ones working hard behind the scenes to make sure the network keeps chugging along smoothly ⛓️ ✨
in today's feature, let's learn a little about @crosnest_com 👇
English
@TRP_DaRainmaker @crosnest_com This is an interesting bit of analysis, and we have not carried out this research on our delegators.
It however does not affect our chosen weights as those ratios have been calculated from the on-chain vote shares rather than the number of voters.
English
@crosnest_com but how many of these wallets were legit
twitter.com/kintsugi_tech/…
Kintsugi Tech@kintsugi_tech
Cosmos Hub proposal #848 167,000~ accounts voted, but how many of those are dust accounts or bots? We exported some data from our nodes, and these are the unfiltered results YES: 95.63% (160,379 accounts) NO: 3.48% (5,843 accounts) ABSTAIN: 0.63% (1,049 accounts) VETO: 0.26% (436 accounts) As you can see, vast majority of the accounts voted YES 🤯 Let's now apply some filters. Here is the same data, but with a delegation amount of more than 1 ATOM YES: 78.79% (24,576 accounts) NO: 16.64% (5,190 accounts) ABSTAIN: 3.23% (1,006 accounts) VETO: 1.35% (420 accounts) Even filtering 136,423 dust accounts, majority of the wallets are still voting for YES 🚀 Let's try now with a 5 ATOM filter. YES: 77.89% (22,573 accounts) NO: 17.30% (5,014 accounts) ABSTAIN: 3.38% (980 accounts) VETO: 1.43% (414 accounts) Results don't change too much, showing a significant win for the YES option. The proposal is currently not passing, since what matters is the stake amount and not the account count, but we think the data is interesting. Finally, let's export the top 3 voters by stake amount of each vote option YES cosmos1lt83tymrlkcg7jtfrzv5370z9uthttpvhf4jd7 (~1,462,681.00 ATOMs) cosmos1grgelyng2v6v3t8z87wu3sxgt9m5s03xvslewd (~1,190,007.00 ATOMs) cosmos1sregzcxh7aagzndr462v9mg42sn5qp6f7cugme (~665,062.90 ATOMs) NO cosmos14lultfckehtszvzw4ehu0apvsr77afvyhgqhwh (~9,404,337.00 ATOMs) cosmos13gyfa66nnvanyn8muck3jzm8srtlq3tz32xasy (~730,073.00 ATOMs) cosmos1ljfjvdg0hps4ysqtckmx87w3hrwv54kn92waqr (~215,810.40 ATOMs) NO WITH VETO cosmos15hmqrc245kryaehxlch7scl9d9znxa58qkpjet (~9,366,343.00 ATOMs) cosmos1xmq9y92td477qs6c6jn5z8mgd4s5dpp0d65efj (~400,000.43 ATOMs) cosmos1f0zwrlfjjl8twrsyxv22p8jdqtym9njaksfs2y (~223,057.30 ATOMs) ABSTAIN cosmos19df8xjykgkxh7ywc4uax5f52vqnfsz8t7st64e (~153,801.87 ATOMs) cosmos1xym2qygmr9vanpa0m7ndk3n0qxgey3ff8vscct (~100,000.00 ATOMs) cosmos1sjllsnramtg3ewxqwwrwjxfgc4n4ef9u0tvx7u (~90,000.00 ATOMs) Disclaimer on the data: Votes snapshot has been exported yesterday (November 24th), and delegations amounts are updated to the same date. In reality, every proposal has a snapshot of delegation amount when is created so there might be some slight changes on the amounts. Raw votes data can be downloaded here: ipfs.io/ipfs/QmZA3Mp9t…
English
We chose a weighted vote for Prop #848.
Why a weighted vote? Due to the divisive nature of the proposal, we feel that it's the best way to amplify the opinion of our delegators.
46% of our delegators have voted with 78% voting YES.
See the full details of the votes below 👇
English
@KaiCryptohk @cosmoshub I personally believe IBC to be something far too important and delicate to be treated like a promotional tool. It's not any less important than securing the chain is.
I don't know what the right solution is, but it's definitely a discussion that needs to take place.
English
Everything has 2 sides. Maybe @cosmoshub should start incentivizing relayer.
ATM, relayer is more like an advertisement for more delegations. However, if you are in the bottom set, you are not profitable enough to provide such a service.
Crosnest@crosnest_com
We've stopped relaying on the @cosmoshub 😢 We've been early adopters and staunch supporters of IBC. We have provided support for many channels and helped ensure the success and growth of the ecosystem, relaying 1.5M transactions with over $500M in total value.
English
@TendermintTimmy @notionaldao Let's all remember we are first and foremost a community, let's all commit to working together to support each other and Cosmos.
English
Is @notionaldao a net negative for the #cosmos ecosystem?
Are you personally fed up with their behavior and actions?
English
@FrauBelz @notionaldao I know it's terrible and barbaric, but come on its _obvious_ they meant "with".
They meant to say they are using children as fuel, not as food! Must think of the environment, too!
English
@notionaldao Hi please edit, Barbecuing with children.
Sounds so scary when you say barbecuing children. It's like you slaughter them. 😊🤝
English
Andrea Sassanelli retweetledi
Note: some of our validators use hetzner and OVH with horcrux and for sentry nodes. Therefore, they do not need to move to move their nodes. We commend them for their top notch security practices!
@crosnest_com @crypto_crew @PFC_Validator
English
@Figment_io @OasisProtocol @EvmosOrg @StargazeZone @gravity_bridge Sad to see you go from these chains.
English
We would like to notify stakers that we will no longer be supporting @OasisProtocol, @EvmosOrg, @StargazeZone, and @gravity_bridge and will begin unbonding on June 18th.
English
@gadikian @EvmosOrg @interchain_io @osmosis @Allinbits_inc Mentioning "names you know" is not better than "naming names", just makes sure your statement is safe while casting a shadow over many healthy community members.
Fighting spam is a must, and the obsession with rank isn't the best thing ever, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.
English
Hey there are some unholy and unnatural IBC volumes going.
I would like to recommend that leaderboard rankings connected to questioned, especially by large delegators like chain foundations (eg: @EvmosOrg @interchain_io @osmosiszone @Allinbits_inc)
The ideal way to deal with this is to heavily heavily disincentivize it. If spammer is fine that instead of getting credit for spam, they end up totally removed from validator sets, then we won't have this problem.
At this time I don't think it's prudent to name names of spammers. Instead, I think it's prudent to name names of teams that I know are not spamming:
@notionaldao
@ccclaimens
@ArchitectNodes
I also want to very strongly recommend that chain foundations do not base delegations on IBC activity before checking for spam, there are IBC relayers who are actively harming your chain right now as we speak.
English
@JoeAbbey It's not easy. Running any infrastructure is a challenge, running a strong one can quickly become hard to sustain. Hold in there and hopefully the market will recover for us all, too.
No shame in being in difficulty, we all are living the reality of the times. Good luck!
English
Andrea Sassanelli retweetledi
Unpopular opinion: there is evidence that the observatory.zone tool is not able to properly track all the nodes operated by validators.
A very interesting discussion is happening between validators and @observatoryzone to work on the tool's limitations.
BackBone Labs Hub@BackBoneLabsHub
1/4 Community Decentrallization Challenge In light of the new observatory tool by @Rockaway_X we will host a community challenge to decentralize @Migaloo_Zone. Watch the Video Tutorial on how to use observatory and read on about the milestones and prizes you can win 👇🏼
English
@Zdeadex If it were just about the profits, a good portion of the chains out there - cosmos and otherwise - would have been long since abandoned.
We are first and foremost a community, let's keep building together!
English
People don't realize that approx 95% of vals are running at lost (and probably not even considering any corporation cost/taxes, salaries or anything in this speculation)
We are early, it's more important that networks are stable even more centralized than taking stupid decisions
Crosnest@crosnest_com
Unpopular opinion: there is evidence that the observatory.zone tool is not able to properly track all the nodes operated by validators. A very interesting discussion is happening between validators and @observatoryzone to work on the tool's limitations.
English
@typocryp @atmon3r @avia_one @crosnest_com That really depends on operations rather than apparent host. The observatory is interesting but can only provide very limited insight into the reality of a complex situation.
English
@atmon3r @avia_one @crosnest_com OK, mais il semble que beaucoup de monde semble utiliser Hetzner, ce qui revient a centraliser aussi...
Que ce passe t'il si Hetzner bloque tout les serveurs servant à Cosmos comme il l'a fait avec Solana?
Français
Hey @crosnest_com, Allez vous participer à l'effort de décentralisation ?
Je vois que vous êtes chez Hetzner.
BackBone Labs Hub@BackBoneLabsHub
1/4 Community Decentrallization Challenge In light of the new observatory tool by @Rockaway_X we will host a community challenge to decentralize @Migaloo_Zone. Watch the Video Tutorial on how to use observatory and read on about the milestones and prizes you can win 👇🏼
Français
@MonetSupply Same time as bullying anyone for any other reason - never. If there really is a performance issue on the job, then it should be dealt with on the job.
In the meantime, let's not forget that as validators we are a large distributed machine - collaborate before competing. always.
English
how long before it's socially acceptable to start bullying high ranked cosmos hub validators who are not pulling their weight?
English
@frensvalidator I don't have the data on hand for all the eight in the list, but it's worth checking when a validator was first bonded.
English
Sad news:
8 validators never voted on any governance proposal
English
What's the validator participation rate on @osmosis?
A thread 🧵👇
English
Andrea Sassanelli retweetledi
🚨 $JKL Now live on Yieldmos 🚨
Auto compound your @jackal_protocol staking rewards to get the highest yield while delegating to any validator!
English
Andrea Sassanelli retweetledi
Proposal #4 on Teritori is ending tomorrow and will limit voting power to 6.6%.
teritori.explorers.guru/proposal/4
Let’s find out what it means in practice. 🧵
English
@lorepregliasco @MorelloFederico Penso sarebbe bene diventasse policy dei candidati non prendere in considerazione quelle che, di fatto, sono offerte incomplete.
Italiano
@MorelloFederico Non è nostra policy, è un aspetto che affrontiamo in un secondo momento con i candidati, anche perché per esperienza riceviamo profili molto diversi, con esigenze e richieste molto diverse.
Italiano
YouTrend cerca una persona che possa fornire supporto sull'analisi politica e istituzionale (preparazione di analisi e ricerche, report, relazione con clienti).
Qui tutte le info e il modulo per candidarsi
👇
bit.ly/candidatura-an…
Italiano
Andrea Sassanelli retweetledi
This year started with narrowing down the focus for the Persistence ecosystem to Liquid Staking & DeFi primitives around liquid staked assets.
In the last 3 quarters, we have advanced on multiple fronts to establish a thriving liquid staking ecosystem.
Let’s dive in 🧵
English