[DIS] Palmyra: RWA Lending on Nervos

[TheFryLock]

One question about the below quote. Sounds like a portion of the 100k being requested will be allocated to Nervos Nation for paid promotion, if that is correct how much and are there any other details you can share around this.

@neon.bit

To make it clear: I do not own any PALM token, nor do I receive anything in exchange for this proposal. As mentioned in the original post, a successful proposal will enable a strategic partnership between ZenGate and Nervos Nation. That will involve Nation helping to educate about the platform when it launches on CKB, which would be a paid promotion. Which I think is fair enough: we want to ensure our future operations are sustainable.

[neon.bit]

@TheFryLock

None of the requested grant amount is earmarked for Nervos Nation. The proposal makes abundantly clear those funds are specifically for development.

Edit: I can see that there is reference to “joint marketing effort between ZenGate and Nervos Nation” - I must clarify that this is incorrect and funds are for ZenGate to use to achieve their milestones. Any reimbursement for Nervos Nation for marketing is outside the scope of the grant.

[Sam_zenGate]

Hi @mdrx - few places to keep up to date with zenGate Socials.

Main ones include:

• zenGate X (Twitter) - our handle is @ZengateGlobal
• zenGate Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdkpYKlWNOpjcUdPXgBz-Dw
• Other Links - zenGateGlobal | Twitter | Linktree

[Sam_zenGate]

@RODR thanks for the question!

As for payment options, the initial demand for these type of transactions and deals are in stables. However, if there is appetite and the right tooling is built out I can see a path forward where CKB holders could potentially provide lending opportunities in stables (i.e use CKB as collateral to borrow USDC and then lend that out to earn yield). This would provide quite an interesting opportunity without required holders to sell CKB.

Something else the team have been keeping an eye out for is iCKB and the opportunities to utilize it for DeFi. The 64k deposits happening into the DAO also demonstrates that holders are looking for opportunities like this. Quite excited to see this play out.

[Yeti]

@Yeti

The other thing I want to see and what I believe is very important to funded projects, is that the work we are paying for is, at least eventually, open source. So that regardless of the longterm success of the project, the work done and CKB specific issues solved along the way are available for future developers (not necessarily direct competitors) to learn from.

So my question is, will the team commit to making the CKB specific code open source?

Hi Sam,

Can you please answer this question about open source code? Thanks

[Sam_zenGate]

Hi @neon.bit thanks for clarifying.

[Sam_zenGate]

Hi @Yeti

Thank you for the question.

I have saying which goes…“Public Funds, means Public Code.”

We have shown a track record of open-sourcing our tooling and have done so already for our Winter Protocol (our tokenization, traceability and data management system powered by UTXO chains). You can look at the documentation as well which we have spent quite a fair amount of time on explaining how it works and how other projects can integrate / fork it for their own purposes.

Winter Protocol | Welcome to Palmyra Docs

Once again… Public Funds = Public Code.

Hope that clears your question up.

[Sam_zenGate]

Thanks for the support!

[Yeti]

Hi Sam, yeah that’s very clear, thanks and good luck!

[Christine_Pi]

Hi Sam I would be much more interested in this project if it were to use the CKB token rather than the PALM token. Is this possible?

Also further reading this proposal, I don’t know how it can bring more exposure to Nervos?

It’s utilising the tech, but it’s kinda hidden underneath all the RWA stuff? The end user wouldn’t even know its using Nervos’s network?

[Sam_zenGate]

Hi @Christine_Pi thanks for the questions and making the time to ask them as I think it is really important to highlight them.

First - we are looking into ways to utilize CKB for the platform (there are ways of doing this we are researching such as borrowing USDC against your CKB then using that USDC to lend the funds). This would allow you to utilize existing value you hold in your wallets and participate in the ecsosytem. Boosting the TVL of CKB further, rather than selling it.

Second, as for exposure - we are quite selective with which chains we work on and have so far focused on eUTXO chains due to ease of interoperability. Most of our users at the start with be Web 2.0 focused and really just want a solution that works. If that means leveraging the super innovative Nervos tech then we really want to leverage this - DIDs is a great example of this. Powered by Nervos in a simple / elegant way.

Hope this makes sense - excited about these partnerships and utilizing best in class technology.

[Yeti]

@Christine_Pi

It’s utilising the tech, but it’s kinda hidden underneath all the RWA stuff? The end user wouldn’t even know its using Nervos’s network?

Hi Christine, this is actually one of CKBs best points. Joyid for example, maybe even the majority of users don’t know what CKB is, let alone that it’s CKBs tech that makes Joyid possible.

And the same will apply to the use of DID in Palmyra, no one will know or care that DID is built on CKB, but due to CKBs tokenomics, there is a value to CKB under the hood.

But I get what your saying and agree that it isn’t going to be something that makes people run out and buy CKB, it’s not that sort of project.

[neon.bit]

Update:

The proposal has passed the first stage and the vote is now live at:

https://dao.ckb.community/thread/vot-palmyra-rwa-lending-on-nervos-53119

[yttomoon]

[JackyLHH]

Updates (Jun 21, 2024)

@neon.bit

An initial down payment of $10k is requested upon acceptance, followed by equal-sized 30% payments upon the completion of each milestone.

Hi @neon.bit , 10% of the total payment (596,694.314 CKB) has been sent to the address on the proposal​：

https://explorer.nervos.org/transaction/0x00825003fae1f0b00fbe2171736452056ca68dd995e3a22470ceaeb966131c63

[matt_ckb]

we are coming up on a year from proposal and integration has not been started. In the interest of a healthy precedent, I’d like to open the discussion around return of the disbursed CKB.

In the fast moving world of blockchain technology and startup environments, it can be assumed that if a plan has not been implemented a year after inception, it is likely that the plan will change.

It would be reasonable to assume that this project will not proceed exactly as described in this post.

It would be reasonable to set a timeline (if work has not started by the 1 year mark of funds disbursal for example)

In the interest of a healthy, functioning system, we need to have some action taken here.

[joonie]

A whole year and nothing happened? That’s just absurd. It should definitely be returned.

[Yeti]

I’m not worried about this particular case, but that’s only because of the project and the team involved, I don’t think there’s any risk of them not returning the CKB if they don’t go forward.

But otherwise I totally agree, something needs be put into the rules for sure.

A year is way too long though, 3 months would be plenty. If your not ready to start building, then just come back when you are.

But this has also been a great example of why paying the funds in CKB isn’t the best way. The original $10k of CKB is worth no where near that, so where is the motivation for them to start building this now?

[matt_ckb]

@Yeti

The original $10k of CKB is worth no where near that, so where is the motivation for them to start building this now?

I agree that things can improve (imo the solution is a CKB recipient entering an on-chain agreement that providers them price certainty if they don’t plan on liquidating soon… but this doesn’t exist yet).

There isn’t a way around disbursing CKB, it is the asset the on-chain treasury will hold and to date is the only trustless asset on CKB. Teams should swap CKB when they receive it (I know there is still noise in the price from proposal->disbursement)

[Yeti]

@matt_ckb

imo the solution is a CKB recipient entering an on-chain agreement that providers them price certainty if they don’t plan on liquidating soon

Can you explain your idea more?

@matt_ckb

There isn’t a way around disbursing CKB, it is the asset the on-chain treasury will hold and to date is the only trustless asset on CKB

USDI seems like it will be the solution to this wouldn’t it?

I know swapping the CKB to ethUSDT on Binance to then send to the proposer doesn’t sit right and just makes a mockery of this being a CKB project, but I think USDI totally changes this.