- This socket is for supporting and maintaining SendWallet by SendNodes. We will add a specific help link within the wallet for users who want to report performance issues or bugs.
- Experiment: $2,500, paid and reviewed monthly, for the life of the experiment
- We will work in the open and self-report monthly
- Link to work: GitHub - sendnodes-io/sendwallet: SendWallet is your gateway to the Pocket Network and broader ecosystem.
- Wallet Address for Socket Payouts: b1628ccc352945538f40fad8f7d6ce1f5c5eb2b1
2 Likes
SendWallet is already used by many in the ecosystem due to its simple and straightforward UX. It will also play an important role in the wpokt bridge app, so I am excited to see the community have more input into the maintenance and support of Sendwallet and to see @ethen and his team work in the open like this.
1 Like
Send Nodes was already paid by the DAO to build a community wallet, which they then turned into a commercial operation favouring their own staking solution.
If we support the maintenance of a Node-runner under the guise of keeping an already-paid-for, private, closed, commercial product as āMaintenanceā, then all Node-runners should be compensated.
This is NOT an experiment. We are not learning anything new or supporting critical parts of the system - we already have a Pocket Wallet. This goes against the Socket guidelines supporting a superfluous addition.
If SN and Co want to build something open source, shareable and of benefit to the entire community, I would support it. This however is the opposite, it breaks funding guidelines and shows favouritism towards one Node-runner over another. If we want to subsidise ALL Node-runners, thatās a separate discussion, and has its own merits.
1 Like
Just to jump in here IIRC SendWallet is open sourced. P sure Iāve look through it a couple times [1]. But the point about it already being paid for has some ground
1 Like
Send Nodes request for compensation has nothing to do with poktpoolās charging structure, youāre pushing a strawman argument, but Iāll respond to your claims:
- To be clear, poktpool charging structure puts it roughly in the middle of the prices staking services charge, there are many POKT staking services that charge more than poktpool.
- POKT holders are free to choose the service they find right for them. Some people like chasing shitcoins for the APR. Some POKT stakers prefer that poktpool has insurance, that providers like Send Nodes donāt have, and are willing to pay more for that extra security.
Back to the original topic:
Can someone from PNI pls tell us how many hours are spent purely on maintenance of the Pocket.Wallet per month?
If itās minimal, which my assumption is, then the price of this Socket should be set appropriately.
The Socket payment should also significantly discount the total amount paid as Send Wallet is used as a commercial vehicle by Send Nodes to channel users to their staking service. As such, only a fraction of the maintenance should be paid by the community, as itās clearly being used as a loss leading marketing tool to funnel users to the Send Nodes staking service monopoly.
1 Like
Before getting to the specific points raised I want to level set re wPOKT and Sendwallet:
Browser functionality is a necessity to minimise user mistakes and remove PNF from the risk of having to process refund requests and acting as 24/7 customer support for wPOKT. Sendwallet is the only pocket wallet with browser functionality and is critical to the launch of wPOKT.
To be abundantly clear: Sendwallet will be the only wallet on launch of wPOKT.
PNF will be announcing a POP in the coming weeks to upgrade and maintain the official Wallet. Browser functionality will be a key new feature. Until then, Sendwallet is vital to the success of wPOKT.
With that in mind:
The previous grant was to build and open source the wallet. This is not the same as having our only browser wallet free of bugs and well maintained for a catalyst event like wPOKT. Keep in mind that we will (hopefully) be welcoming a new cohort of users interacting with our ecosystem through wPOKT and they deserve the best, most functional and most secure browser wallet possible.
I strongly disagree with this framing because 1, see reasoning above and 2, itās happening through a mechanism that could not be more open (evidenced by us having this conversation).
Sendwallet is a critical part of the ecosystem in the context of wPOKT, and having an open ticketing system for bugs and maintenance of sendwallet is a new functionality. I believe users want the product better maintained and more functional and you disagree. What could be more of an experiment than to see which one it is when Ethen is back here in a month self-reporting on how many tickets were raised and bugs squashed.
Re PNI and the main wallet, I donāt think itās a good comparison and is debating a hypothetical rather than just using the evidence of this socket in a months time to tell us if Ethen did a good job of sizing or not. This is the main idea behind using Evidence over Confidence.
As a reminder:
Sockets are small seed-style grants that support community contributors to rapidly spin up and experiment with contributions towards our ambitions.
A Socket request can be opened under the Build / Socket section of the Forum. It is open to anyone that meets the lite Permissions criteria
Sendnodes are using the mechanisms available to them and to anyone else who meets the criteria.
I frankly donāt know if $2500 is the right price for this first month of an experiment but it seems a very small price to pay to give us confidence that our only browser wallet is in top shape for wPOKT, and I think the evidence from the work on IBC, Testnet, Design and PoktNews shows that we have a community that takes opening a Socket and putting their reputation on the line very seriously.
Regardless, we will all be back here soon with a month of maintenance history and learning a lot about our mechanisms and our judgement, and thatās an inherently good thing.
5 Likes
Ethen states below that this socket potentially doesnāt cover wPOKT.
Can we please confirm it does? Otherwise the above arguments are moot.
1 Like
Weāre using sendwallet to connect directly to your wallet, which does work and is currently being tested.
I imagine that @ethen is likely referring to an in wallet wpokt integration, as opposed to having to use the main wpokt app?
1 Like
To be really clear on all of this, this Socket was opened on the basis of the information included in the first post in this topic. Thatās what I assume Sendnodes is working to, and I canāt really comment on a screenshot from somewhere else which is a question for Ethen.
But just to clarify, if Sendnodes came back in public in 3 weeks and said āThere werenāt enough bugs to squash so we also jumped in to support this other keystoneā, would it really matter? Personally, I want to see us hold people accountable to working in public and showing us results and impact that give the DAO an ROI towards one or more of our stated ambitions. Thereās an element of needing to allow people with the best understanding of their capabilities to have some agency over how they deploy them to support all of us on the things that matter most
So I would prefer to see more Sockets open and for all of us as a community to engage in faster cycles of learning and iteration, meaning we quickly close Sockets down where insufficient impact is being delivered but we at least hold off until we have enough evidence to determine that, instead of litigating everything upfront so much. Once we have more data in place from making enough mistakes, only then can we truly say we understand where we need to put additional guardrails in place.
4 Likes
Again, to be clear, the wallet is not buggy, it may be slow, but its fully operational.
Users with any is issues can reach out through Discord and Telegram just like they always have. And we will be at their service just like we always have.
1 Like
Confirming this Socket was closed in November as the community was not requiring this level of support.
1 Like