Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Widen language to include space for protocols and dApps, not just blockchains or networks #24

Open
safeharbor-reader opened this issue Apr 17, 2021 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #25
Open

Comments

@safeharbor-reader
Copy link

There are several instances where the proposal seems to assume the project is building a new blockchain. For example, the proposal only refers to "networks". However many, if not most new projects would call themselves "protocols", "decentralized apps", or "dApps" that are built on top of existing blockchains or networks. Both blockchains and dApps often create a native token. I believe the spirit of the proposal would include both of these, so I think the language should make it clear such protocols are also exempted. Clear examples of the types of protocols I'm referring to are things like Compound, or Uniswap.

Specific examples of the language I'm referring to are:

Preliminary Notes - "However, for a network to mature into a functional..." -> I'd recommend widening the scope, so as to include protocols. Perhaps "However, for a network, decentralized app, or "dApp" to mature into a functional..."

Section (b)(ii) - "A narrative description of the steps necessary to independently access, search, and verify the transaction history of the network" -> Here it says "the network" as if the project is a network. Might recommend changing this to "the network being built, or the network on which the protocol will be built"

Section (b)(iii)(B) - "Information detailing the method of generating or mining Tokens, the process for burning Tokens, the process for validating transactions, and the consensus mechanism;" -> I would expand the scope here to say, "and if applicable, a process for validating transactions and the consensus mechanism"

Section (b)(iii)(E) - "A hyperlink to a block explorer." -> I would add something like, "A hyperlink to a block explorer for the proposed network, or for the network on which the protocol may be built"

Of course the exact language can be discussed further, but my high level intention is to create space in this Safe Harbor for the decentralized protocols and apps that are built on top of blockchains, in addition to the blockchains themselves.

@safeharbor-reader safeharbor-reader changed the title Leave space for dApp protocols, not just blockchains Widen language to include space for protocols and dApps, not just blockchains or networks Apr 17, 2021
safeharbor-reader added a commit to safeharbor-reader/SafeHarbor2.0 that referenced this issue Apr 17, 2021
This fixes CommissionerPeirce#24. 

The core change is to explicitly state that this proposal includes protocols, and decentralized apps ("dApps") as well as blockchain networks. Such dApps (eg. Compound, or Uniswap) are built on top of blockchain networks, and constitute the majority of new projects in the space. So having clarity on this point is crucial. And since both dApps and blockchains often sell tokens and both aspire to full decentralization, it seems appropriate to include them.

Note: the original issue suggested other changes, but upon reading through it again, I think the one change to clarify the definition of "network" up top may be sufficient.
@safeharbor-reader safeharbor-reader linked a pull request Apr 17, 2021 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant