Okay the objective view changed… but we still could have an shimmer network if the users wants it.
we have following options =
a) close it, shut it down because all our energy should be on iota-rebased
b) take a snapshot, relaunch on Rebase with old fixed suppy
c) get running iota 2.0 on shimmer, with layer2 EVM
(its not a competitor of iota rebase, shimmer doesnt have L1 SC's)
If this is a running system on testnet, why not let it run for the community
as a community driven network. (Maybe we can get synergy-effects with
IOTA Rebased + Shimmer 2.0)
This is only an open Discussion… Shimmer should always be community driven, from the beginning. So, why not thinking about it…
Option A would greatly damage the rebased version of Iota. I don’t think IF would consider this (unless I’m the only community member who is not surprised)
I think with Option C, it’s all positive.
I honestly don’t understand why there should be any other option than C. We had a running Testnet for IOTA 2.0 for multiple months now and it seems to run well, so why not just release it on Shimmer?
This would mean Shimmer still had some reason to exist since it is technologically unique, it would be something fundamentally different than IOTA Rebased (so no competition), but still a very interesting project for techies. And if someone would want to continue that vision of the protocol (probably unlikely though), they would have the chance to do so. What is there to lose with that option? The alternatives are just sad.
Option C, 100%. I’m ready to keep building my application on the Shimmer network. Being feeless makes all the difference. Launch IOTA 2.0 on Shimmer ASAP!
Option C is the best option for all parties involved.
Since there is no L1 SC, it is not a competitor of IOTA rebase.
IF would remove the stain from its name because everyone would see that they managed to do what they promised. - 2.0 protocol on SMR that works as promised
The community and investors in SMR would not lose their money and there would be no bad blood within the community.
It would also confirm the explanation that it was no longer time to develop the L1 SC on 2.0 protocol due to the urgent demands of the market and not as it looks now: that the whole concept was an impossible mission and that’s why IF gave up…
To conclude:
2.0 on SMR would restore IF’s credibility as a top team of experts and researchers in the DLT space. (not copy/paste experts as they turn out now)
This would make their decision for IOTA Rebase justified and logical considering the conditions in the market - Also the future decisions of the IF for IOTA would be much more appreciated and accepted by the market than now.
I fully agree with what’s been said—Option C is clearly the best path forward. It preserves Shimmer’s purpose, avoids community backlash, and proves IF can deliver on promises. The 2.0 testnet has run successfully, so why not launch it on Shimmer? There’s nothing to lose, and it ensures Shimmer remains relevant and valuable.
Hans Moog did an interesting statement on twitter, how he sees this. → x.com
Another problem with C)
Who implements iota 2.0 on smr?
Who solves problems, happening on smr?
Will Bloom adap it? Will firefly be ready for it?
What happens to magicsea and other dexes, are they willing to build and support both protocols?
Do we need a testchain for smr, if new devs want to test it out?
Who runs the validators? Will DLT-Green do it?
Is it a community-split, which will definitely harm both projects?
I know garreth and linus are talking, but whats their opinion after several days?
BIG Problem → if there are no devs for the Iotacore protocol, make it any sense to let it run? Or if we split the devs of Rebase to support shimmer, is it in foresigh of a competition with other hundreds projects more disadvantageous?
Option C looks great am all for a grass roots grown platform. Thinking forward I’m imagining it would require a full team to manage, maintain, secure, develop, market ie a decent sized warchest. Without direct IF support where does this come from and what is the underlying value proposition that is unique here…
Only option A is the right option! And to all C voters:
Are you paying for the integration on Shimmer? Maybe me? Maybe the user above you? Do you pay and run the nodes for it? Who creates the necessary official documentation? Who pays for the programming and maintenance of the wallet? And then? And then what? Then you have IOTA 2.0 on Shimmer! Wow! And now what? Now you can send SMR for free (now you can too, by the way) and use mana to do so. But you have no EVM and therefore NO dApps and no real usability. Ahhh I see… we want the EVM too, don’t we? And who pays for this integration? And if we then have an EVM on L2, who writes the dApps for it? You? Me? The user above you? And who will buy SMR with IOTA 2.0? Especially WHERE??? CEX? Who will pay for the integration there? You? Me? OK, then DEX! And who programs everything there? You? Me? And who provides liquidity? You? Me?
You can see where I’m going with this. Many are clamoring for IOTA 2.0 on Shimmer, but have no plan for how it will be implemented, who will provide the resources and who will PAY for it! But the main thing is that the price rises again so that you sell everything and never come back. LOL?!
The IF has not forgotten the experience it has gained overnight. All this can and will certainly be reused in the future, but until then “we” have to MOVE FORWARD! IOTA should finally be USED and not ONLY for great free transactions, because if free transactions were the ULTRA-MEGA-GIGA-POWER-2000-XL selling point, IOTA would now not be 150 on CMC but TOP3!
I have invested a lot of money in Shimmer, Dom probably more than all of us put together. And yet I want IOTA to be more successful than ever before, because then I’ll laugh about the loss with Shimmer! So. Full concentration, power, resources, money and motivation on IOTA and NOTHING ELSE!!!
If IF thinks they should concentrate 100% on rebase and doesn’t want to finish what they promised (2.0 and evm on shimmer), then they should fairly compensate all SMR holders with IOTA tokens. (“Fortunately” they have enough of them in the their treasury.)
The compensation should be at a minimum ratio of 1 SMR = 0.15 IOTA otherwise this is just another Q scam.
28.11.2023. before Iota Rebase decision was made the ratio was 1 SMR = 0.22 IOTA
1 IOTA = $0.171
1 SMR = $0.038
Here’s a little reminder of WHY IF should do this:
(If they do not want to deliver as promised):
IF promoted SMR not only as a test network but also as a network that will have its own way once development is complete.
They clearly stated in their blog posts that all IOTA upgrades will come to SMR first.
They encouraged people to invest in SMR EVM and to get involved in projects.
(let’s just remember that “The Shimmer Liquidity Mining Campaign” promotion, the timing of which is very indicative. From the current point of view, it seems to me that this campaign was created only to attract as many investors as possible who would provide enough liquidity so that those who know could get rid of their SMR. (They did this after they already made a decision about IOTA Rebase so they knew everything…)
Many people didn’t have enough money to invest extra money (they have already invested all in IOTA), so for many of us, the only way to participate more in SMR EVM projects was to exchange IOTA for SMR for example to offer liquidity in various dex projects.
From the SMR price table, it is very clear that the people from IF and probably many of their friends knew exactly what the plan was and that SMR would no longer be needed for the IOTA project. That’s why the SMR price dropped so sharply at that time because they sold their SMR stock. (This is called inside trading - which is a criminal offense) - of course it is very difficult to prove, but the price says it all…
If it wasn’t them, then they weren’t paying enough attention because the information was obviously leaked.
So let me conclude:
If IF no longer wants to deal with Shimmer then they should compensate the token holders and clean up the mess they made.
1 SMR = 0.15 IOTA (minimum)
This should not be a big problem for the foundation because they have big tresury: They printed billions of Iota tokens in the last change, so the amount of 217 M should not be a problem.
For example, they can set a deadline of 3 months for the redemption of SMR at that exchange rate. So those who actively participated in various Shimmer projects and the community still actively follow it have enough time to replace it. - this can also come with some lock period on compensated tokens, similar to ASMB compensation.
If IF leaves Shimmer it’s the only way to compensate their community fairly (Because the SMR community is the one who had the most trust in them by following all their recommendations and helping them test different concepts and products)
The biggest believers of Iota were in smr - because they believed in the vision that Iota and smr had and they wanted to help it come to the real world faster.
Now leaving them bankrupt after blindly following them for 7-8 years would be extremely unethical.