Hey @cottoneyejoe , the write up you did for the xEIP is the most important part by far, as this helps sharing your vision, influence the team, and down the road, these changes might be done without the need of a vote to occur. And again, the vote is just a way to confirm that the community wants something, not a way to get things decided and executed on.
1 - yes toward investors in xExchange which at current status I think are many. So many over time have invested in MEX so it is perhaps the largest segment of âusersâ. In the conference it was said to enhance metastaking but never about MEX, I donât recall hearing the term âMEXâ mentioned at all.
2 - sorry I missed the 6 communications, and I apologize about that because going back I actually missed something.
3 - booster v2. i am (was) angry with the fact that this delay also affected their delay which could have happened earlier (or maybe not), this is because they often said they were waiting for you.
4 - swap 1 btc. it is a complaint towards the ecosystem sure. and I donât blame Ashswap (they brought other innovations), Onedex (at least they brought another bridge) but I blame xExchange because it is the flagship dex of the foundation (it seemed).
Indirectly the responsibility for liquidity is also associated with developments of both dex and mvx as foundation.
5 - true is in general toward the ecosystem. so many times dates have been launched and never met so I am glad that the air in MVX is to not provide more dates but real and feasible things.
6 - xfabric is not colleced to xexchange, it was just to say that we expect transparency from everyone. donât avoid speeches or respond only when pressured.
7 - true you did, but the comment was general.
8 - I donât remember news for the auto-claim (I went back and looked it up), I would have liked to have had more news about the status in the release notes or in another annoucement.
9 - I appreciate the fact that you took the time to write a response and I know it could have been busy with something else, so I will work to make this conversation productive from here in the future. And I really appreciate how committed YOU are to this, and I wish many others would do that and take an example from your approach to this discussion.
I really notice the great effort and I want to say that there is no hard feelings or negativity, just respect for your time and work.
10 - 1 year: i know a lot has been done, but people donât get it. but by the way i really liked the video comparing v2 and v3, that one really makes the point! Thatâs the kind of communication the community needs.
11 - itâs true the anger comes more from investors and iâm glad you have that in mind as well. where feedback comes in it will be my concern to re-direct it veso the agora and/or write a thread of requested changes myself.
12 - it is true, I definitely attributed to xExchange team responsibilities that actually are not theirs and things not caused by xExchange.
Transition side v2->v3 I understand now, you focused on things not done in v2 and promised not on bringing new things to a âpoorâ infrastructure. Definitely the best choice, not appreciated by many who expected stratospheric novelties but it is a good choice!
Now that v3 is behind you and you have a nice base underneath I am sure those novelties that the user wants will come (the ones that create hype :)) )
I understand now anyway!
13 - yes the space with GRM, which if I may say has not been great, not your side eh. but just the âorganizationâ side, I would prefer more a townhall with you rather than just a poorly run space. I find this discussion between us much more stimulating for everyone than that space.
âLast note: It also seems to me that a lot of your anger and cynicism has to do about MultiversX and its ecosystem and not xExchange itself. I feel you and I think a lot of things can continue to be improved. Just wanted to highlight the fact that MultiversX and xExchange are still 2 different things and we should distinguish them.â
You are right, and I tend to forget that myself, and that leads to anger and discussions like these.
I confirm, the âanger and cynicismâ is toward MVX as an ecosystema and often turns into âattacksâ directed toward teams/units that have nothing to do.
Itâs just that maybe we still have no idea how mvx is structured, who makes the decisions and how therefore we take it out on the first guy who comes along. That is absolutely wrong of course! Itâs just often hard to make a difference.
I have learned a lot from this discussion, more than I would have learned in tweets, and I really appreciate your time! I will try not to make it in vain!
Thanks Lucas!
2 Likes
Sorry for asking yet again but you also seem to have yet again failed to answer my question.
When are we, users, expected to be able to participate in Governance votes by actively proposing said governance votes?
It was mentioned in the V2 Paper (which was voted on and approved) that we, users, will be able to propose things to be voted upon.
2. âAt the end of the 5th year, we envision that the governance counsel will submit the followingâŚâ
"Announcing the first governance vote after xExchange goes live Will be a very important
event. xMEX holders Will be able to influence xExchange design and the utility of the native
token.
Example: Initially, the removal fee will be split 50%-50% between a burn and a redistribution
to xMEX holders. But maybe there is a better ratio that a governance vote could determine
by choosing between several options, e.g. (1) 30%-60%, (2) 50%-50% and (3) 60%-30% "
And if that is not enough proof, I want to quote the docs here:
"Exchange Governance allows the community to propose xExchange Improvement Proposals (xEIPs) and to vote for them. This is a two-step process:
1. Drafting an xEIP and converging to its best version (off-chain).
[âŚ]
2. Voting the xEIP (on-chain). Once you have converged with the community to the best version of the draft, you will create the xEIP on-chain and submit it to vote."
âif you have a decent level of confidence that your proposal will be approved by the majority of the community, it is time to submit it to the on-chain governance vote!â
Yes I have! So how can I propose it?
âThe xEIP can be published for on-chain voting by calling the governance smart contract, and will then be visible on xExchange governance page (xExchange).â
Ah! On the Governance website I am able to call the smart contract 
Okay letâs see⌠nope
âYou will then create the on-chain proposal: by providing the hash of the proposal text and depositing 1 billion MEX.â
I am failing to do so
My question is simple, since obviously the last time you gave me an ETA it was not about what I actually asked, but what you understood (âwhen will the smart contract go liveâ). And you said it went live now. Okay - but then why arenât you able to answer my question multiple times now and give us an ETA (yes estimated i know) when we will finally be able to propose?
It should have been here long ago, even before you became the Head, so I am not blaming you fully, but I do expect an answer.
And I hope it is clear why I am asking this:
- it was promised and never delivered, but,
- and this is equally important: I have no motivation to continue writing more xEIPs and discussing on this forum about new ideas, if the stuff we talk about here can never be publicly voted on, on-chain.
I talked to some other users and they feel the same way. âWhy write on the xExchange Agora forum, if we cannot vote on it anywaysâ. It doesnât make sense. Governance without active participation by the community is not governance. This is simply a self-congratulatory/self-confirmation poll for what the Foundation already had in mind anyways (and the outcome of the poll is therefore null and void).
Governance means: the community, the stakeholders, heck, Iâll do it and call us shareholders - Governance means the shareholders have a right in participation. And participation is not approving already existent plans for affirmation. It means actively proposing stuff and voting on it. And JUST proposing it without ever being able to vote on it is not governance.
In our current system, there is only one single entity, one (political - reference) party that has the say, and thatâs the Foundation. That is not governance. That is a centralized system, developed and decided only by the centralized entity and centralized owner.
Sure you can do that, but then, you (and the previous heads of Maiar Exchange) should never have promised Governance then.
And before we go into the discussion of whether it was >>promised<<, or not, again, I think I provided sufficient evidence above. If necessary I could probably go back even further to before the release of Maiar Exchange (and during the 1st year of Maiar Exchange) where Governance was often mentioned and described in various blog articles and on the website.
Anyways, the information I provided here should be enough to hopefully get an answer thank you.
1 Like
It is great to see you have come to your senses. 80% of what you wrote didnt even have anything to do with xExchange or the team behind it and the rest was wild accusations (some of which provably not true like the lack of communication regarding v3).
It would be great to see you engage actively on the agora and propose well-thought through and researched economical-sound ideas for the xExchange that, on top, can be implemented without too much hassle. That is the core thing we need right now.
And please, I mean you did come to your senses, but please refrain from such anger outbursts on the agora. They are not productive and only cost yourself and Lucas and everyone involved valuable living time.
And as the saying goes⌠people who do not care about your time are worse than people who do not care about (spending) your money (correctly).
Productive discussions are what the agora should be about not ⌠thisâŚ
1 Like
Letâs cut through the rhetoric and face the facts:
The promise of community-driven proposals has become a mirage, constantly shifting beyond our reach. Consider this: In the time since the V2 Paper was approved, entire blockchain ecosystems have sprung up, implemented full governance, and even evolved to second-generation models. Uniswap, for instance, moved from basic governance to a more sophisticated delegate system in less time than itâs taken us to implement basic proposal capabilities that arenât even live. And donât forget Uniswap existed before Maiar Exchange even went live.
This isnât just falling behind; itâs like weâre still using a horse and buggy while others have launched rockets. (And wasnât MuliversX always talking about âwe are building rocketsâ?)
Weâre trapped in a paradox of our own making. The question isnât just when weâll be able to propose - itâs whether the concept of community governance here has become a philosophical zombie.
We need more than vague assurances or shifting timelines. We need a concrete roadmap with immutable milestones. Without this, weâre not participants in a decentralized ecosystem; weâre not holders; weâre not the people with âskin in the gameâ (quote from the V2 whitepaper) - weâre not shareholders, stakeholders or people of relevance, our voice is factually irrelevant, instead, we would be (right now, are) merely spectators in a predetermined script set by the Foundation.
Itâs high time the team built the model we were promised, or openly acknowledge that the existing model - centralized control - is whatâs intended to persist.
The clock isnât just ticking; itâs echoing through the halls of missed opportunities and unfulfilled potential. How much longer before that echo fades into irrelevance?
Please answer my our question: Wen Governance?
answer my question or keep us all in silence and shadows forever. I will not bug you again about this.
This is my last time.
- iâm out
(Disclaimer: Iâm in holidays from yesterday to Thursday, so answering more concisely to you @bnistor4 @cottoneyejoe in this message)
Hey @bnistor4 , I really appreciate the constructiveness of the discussion and your detailed answers! 
- Indeed, never pronounced âMEXâ during the conf. As you note we can propose things positively impacting MEX without pronouncing the term, but I understand now what you were expecting
- Really no worries! And we could always communicate more and better on our side.
- Understand your expectations for booster v2 to happen sooner Note that Hatom reached out to xExchange about the booster v2 plan in April 2024, once xExchange was far into the v3 release, and so it was impossible for xExchange to change plans at the time and prioritize faster their needs.
- Understand your expectations for the flagship DEX. Note that liquidity providers donât really care if the DEX is the flagship one or not. They provide if the rewards / conditions are good to them.
-
- Yes, understand and agree
- Got it
- At the moment we released v3, we shared an update of the roadmap for v3, v3.1, v3.2, v3.3. But again, we could always communicate more and better. Also, for the v3 release announcement last week, we didnât mention precisely v3.1, v3.2, v3.3 again because we are going to reconsider again the roadmap (as time has passed and priorities might have changed) and do a public communication when the roadmap is updated.
- Thank you very much!
- Thank you again! A lot of effort went into this one.
- Perfect
- Yes, it was and is still a tough choice
But now this is done and we can move forward. - Noted (although donât take this for a promise we will do one for sure)
âLast note: âŚâ: Yes, I totally understand that from the outside it is really not clear how MultiversX is structured, who does what, who is responsible for what. Thatâs a good piece of feedback.
Also, wanted to add as a conclusive note on my side that anytime somebody complains or has anger, there is a good reason behind. So Iâm really happy that you shared your mind and succeeded to explain the things that you were not happy about. Please continue to do so, it is very helpful for me to understand what the community and investors feel and want!
Hey @cottoneyejoe , thank you for sharing your mind and pushing for more clarity here, so Iâll try to be very concise and clear:
1. Status of the governance:
- With v3, the governance smart contract is live, so the last technical limitation has been removed.
- At the moment, there is no user interface to submit a proposal, and if you submit a proposal by directly interacting with the smart contract, it wonât appear in the interface automatically. There is no ETA at the moment to add this.
- In conclusion, for the team to submit proposals, the last technical limitation has been removed. For the community to submit proposals, more needs to be done: there is no ETA at the moment but it might be done in the future.
2. The role of the community:
- The community is extremely valuable for:
(1) sharing feedback (i.e. things they like / donât like and the team reflects on how to improve)
(2) suggesting improvements (i.e. unformal ones or formal xEIP ones as youâve done very well so far)
(3) voting on proposed improvements, in order to confirm or infirm the proposals - As mentioned in the previous message, the system would be very broken if the community could submit a proposal to vote, vote in favor of it, and expect it to be implemented, without the team being in the loop at any time. This is because the community is completely clueless (a) on whether or not the proposal is well defined, (b) on the amount of efforts and resources it would take, (c) on what are the other things the team wonât be able to work on while working on implementing this, etc. Thatâs also the reason why citizens donât directly decide on what the government should do, but rather elect a government that decides on its own (of course, simplifying here).
- The work you did and that other community members did of suggesting (well detailed) improvements is the help expected from the community and is the best help that could be provided to the team. And we are very thankful for this!
3. xExchange vs other DEXes:
- The reason the xExchange governance is at this current state is because it has not been prioritized at all and it has not been worked on at all.
- Arguments like âxExchange should do it because other DEXes do itâ are just authority arguments which are void to me. Please explain your view without referring to any other DEX as a proof of authority.
4. Promises on the governance:
- Iâve personally never announced or promised anything at the governance level.
- Before me, to my knowledge, no promise was given that the community will have full governance power, and no ETA was given. A vote in the 5th year means a vote in 2027. And âinfluenceâ is given by allowing people to vote.
- The document indeed mentions the possibility for people to submit xEIP and vote, and as mentioned, it is still in the plan, but no ETA. Plus, it is important to note that votes will be indicative and wonât imply the team will implement them at all. It will be a way for the community to express itself further.
I think everything youâve asked for should be cleared up now! It might not be the thing you want but at least everything is cleared up. Please let me know if it is not
Also, thank you very much for pushing for more clarity! The community deserved more clarity on this topic. Please note that communicating and providing clarity takes a lot of time (on top of all the other things that have to be done). So if there is a lack a clarity somewhere, it is most likely due to a lack of time to clarify than the willingness to hide something. Hopefully I got some holidays which give me some free time to answer
Wish you a great week-end guys and thank you very much for your time and efforts!
1 Like
Thank you Lucas. This answer is finally clear to me unlike the two before. All I wanted was a clear answer and I have now received it. Thank you.
Regarding thisâŚ
Yes you are right, it is an authority argument primarily.
But if you look deeper into it, it is no longer.
I am most certain you have read my xEIPs since you have praised me for them a few times. Given this state, let me explain why on-chain voting for community-proposed xEIPs is important in a few words because I am sure you will piece together the entire picture yourself.
- DAO Aggregators/Yield Optimizers, governance power, price appreciation
- Additional utility
- Community feels like they have a voice
- More active engagement by the community in discussions and proposals
- Keeping community engaged, ensuring quorum is always met thanks to active cm
- successful model proven by other DEXes (hence my authoriative argument, I was thinking you would be able to see it directly)
And regarding this:
Yes, you did not promise it. Yes no ETA was given. But it was promised before (I count the V2 whitepaper a promise of implementation). And the current docs as well.
yep it is thanks
1 Like