Mon. Jun 21st, 2021
    DevEx #30, Free TON, Meetup

    The meetup participants discussed what influenced the failure of the auction contest, what actions should be taken to develop the community, and also decided what to do about the incorrect SDK Binding vesting payment and reviewed the proposal for a Recurring Payments contest (‘subscriptions’).

    Auction Contest Failure: What To Do?

    The On-line auctions implementation contest was a fiasco: only two applications were submitted, and the jury members did not vote for various reasons. Also, many judging members were affiliated (from those teams that offered solutions) but simply stayed silent — instead of voting “abstain”, as the rules require.

    It has been decided to extend the contest for another month (and an additional two weeks for voting) because contestants and potential participants simply did not have enough time available. Although, according to Mitja, in 2-3 weeks it is possible to solve many tasks. It’s enough to watch the programming stream — what can be written in just 5 hours.

    At the same time, contestants who have already submitted applications can improve their work by receiving criticism and feedback from the judges. And this in the end can bring a much better chance of winning.

    Alexander S, a participant in Free TON contests, said that negative feedback from the judges discourages submissions. And since the judging now consists of 80% of the Subgovernance initial members, they were presented this proposal: to separate the initial members and the judging. “So there will be a kind of the second instance after judging,” Alexander S explained, “and I will be able to come to someone and examine this or that situation in detail. Then the developers will have a desire to take part in other contests”.

    Communication Problems

    Mitja believes the problem is not so much in the contest’s timing, as in the very interaction of the community. It is necessary to organize and promote the contests properly, as well as to attract more people to disseminate information – announcements. Perhaps administrative payments need to be increased to get new entrants into Subgovernance. Mitja believes that the more people there are, the better the judging will eventually become.

    Sergey Tyurin suggested PR campaigns in various groups on smart contracts, Solidity, and not necessarily related to Free TON. Since the prizes offered in the contests are quite attractive, people should be interested. It is necessary to deal with the distribution closely, including publications in projects such as Cointelegraph.

    Mitja is sure that people will certainly be interested not only in rather serious rewards for their work but will also understand that you can get an excellent opportunity to earn money:

    Now, for the development of entrepreneurship, in the good sense of the word, absolutely greenhouse conditions have been created in Free TON. You can create your team, participate in contests and you will have money to pay your employees right away.

    Alexey Novikov promised to contact the participants of such Subgovernances as SMM, DePR, so they could allocate people who would be able to efficiently distribute information about Free TON.

    Unsuccessful Contests: Is It Worth Rewarding Jury Members

    Andrew Nedobylsky noted he did not even participate in the voting of the On-line auctions implementation contest as a judge, because there were unpleasant impressions that there were no rewards for past judging (DeNS, Part 2).

    I don’t want to waste my time. Andrew Nedobylsky

    And he thinks that this way the jurors will just leave, but there could be a problem in recruiting new judges.

    It was decided by a majority vote that those jurors who gave a score and motivated it in detail should be rewarded for their work, regardless of whether the contestants received the reward. The rewards will also be distributed to the judges of the last contest (DeNS-2).

    Pavel P also added that if anyone is unhappy with the decision of the judges, you can join the group to discuss.

    SDK Binding: Problem With Vesting

    When paying vestings, Alexey Novikov discovered that Go and Golang were mistakenly placed in different categories and that both languages were paid 50,000 as first place (the second place winner was paid half as much). As a result, the second participant, who received second place in points, has already been paid 1.5 thousand more than necessary. What to do in such a situation?

    Alexey Novikov suggested several options:

    1. Completely stop payments as if they were done. But in this case, the person’s motivation to support the binding will be unclear.
    2. Reduce the monthly vesting payments to the required amount (as for the second place). As a result, the participant will receive 38,000 for the year (less than if not changed). But it will have the sense for him to maintain the bindings.
    3. Not to change anything and continue to pay the vesting to the contestant as for the first place. However, in this case, it will be unfair to the team that took the real first place.

    Most of the call participants supported the second option. In this regard, it was decided to adjust the number of monthly payments.

    Recurring Payments (‘Subscriptions’) Smart Contract System Contest Proposal

    Renat Skitsan proposed a new Recurring Payments contest, a business model for so-called subscriptions. In his opinion, it is one of the leading and healthy current business models in the world:

    Users provide access to themselves, agree on a certain amount… And adapting to cryptocurrency for such purposes is a pretty good idea.

    At the moment there is streaming toking, but it’s the same as vesting in a DePool when staking is provided. But, according to the contest initiator, this has nothing to do with the mass user.

    “There has to be an experience, like ‘set it and forget it,'” explained Renat Skitsan. “Subscribe to some draft, DeBot, get a premium feature – i.e. an on-chain action. And the user should be automatically charged from his wallet for the amount and period that he signed the transaction. This is the only way to get some acceptance among users. And Free TON will have some reasonable model of monetizing their products. It will be the implementation of what has not yet been fully implemented in any project”.

    Pavel P agreed that this is a great contest and can be published on the forum.


    Alexei Novikov noted the awkward system of publishing code in the Free TON repository: “You have to create an intermediate empty repository, apply with it, and then transfer the code…”

    Pavel P agreed that there are problems: “We decided that while the guys themselves will fork the code there (those who are now in the repository). If anyone wants to join in, please do. The process, unfortunately, was not as trivial as expected”.

    Mitja believes the forks should be done by the contestants.

    Participants of the meetup decided that this issue should be discussed separately, perhaps at the next meeting.