Community-based Verification (proposal)

Hi everyone. I’d like to discuss one interesting idea which can help us to build sustainable ecosystem and solve some current issues.

As you know, waves allows to create new tokens easily, so we have a lot of them. Some represent real projects, some just test assets, also many tokens are spam and scam. It’s important to give users good instrument to distinguish between them. Real projects should be able to set some additional information like unique ticker and logos. Spam tokens should be quickly detected and banned in wallets.

Currently we don’t pay much attention to this question. And we don’t have good tools and procedures for this. Moreover it’s not clear who should do it. In fact Waves company position itself as software developer rather than some arbiter. So what if do something like community-based asset verification?

Now, if we think, some parties can create and maintain separate registries of assets and user can decide which one to use, or maybe use combination of several ones. Same tools can be used to create customized wallets with custom set of assets.

So what if we do following:

  1. Develop some protocol (format) which describes list of verified and scam assets.
  2. Consume this format in all wallets/explorers/bots to distinguish assets
  3. Give an ability for users to switch between different sources

Then we can see how it goes and possibly create some committee to maintain default waves community list. There should be some agreed requirements for projects to apply (e.g. informative website, unique name, etc…). Procedure may include community-wide voting or committee members approvals. It should also include some time period to allow others to dispute. Also I’d suggest to introduce some kind of fees here - project owners should buy and burn some amount of WCT to apply, e.g. 100 or 1000 WCT. I think this is reasonable.

Technically I see two ways how this can be implemented:

  1. As a plain files in github repository. We have such tools as pool requests and reviews here). It’s technically the easiest way.
  2. On some account in blockchain. Committee can create multisig account and use data transactions to store information. It requires some extra tools, but it can become interesting blockchain-based project.

What do you think about this? Any other ideas? Maybe someone is interested in it?


I think this is a great idea but you should pursue option #2 in my opionion. This is a great usecase where a blockchain comes in.

Maybe some kind of voting portal should be implemented in the client. Projects can apply for a vote by sending some amount of WCT to an address containing a smart contract. This smart contracts initializes the vote, burns 80% of WCT send and distributes 20% to the people who voted after the vote is done. If you hold WCT your vote weighs more with a cap of 5000 (random rumber) WCT (to prevent centralization from WCT whales).

If a token is voted for it gets verified and gains a ticker and symbol.

For users who don’t want to make use of this feature they can disable it in settings.

In my opinion, projects should be allowed to uovote their peoject token as a reasonable one. As well provide website, and social channels too.
I can’t accept forcing token creators to buy WCT.

Also regarding tokens which tend to impersonate other tokens on waves dex, date of issuance should be considered too.

Good idea as I understand waves would want to distance themselves from verification responsibility. I would like to suggest a type of KYC, perhaps using CIVIC or similar that requires token creators to pass KYC verification that is also secure.

Companies must pay for application the WCT token purchase and burn is a good idea

Also… should a project be a legally registered entity? Not sure how community feels about this.

Who would serve on the organization? How would nomination work… I would suggest perhaps creating and NPO with a board and a constitution and members get elected to serve on the board for a term.

We could also perhaps use WCT to nominate and vote for representatives.That representative then holds that WCT to vote for or against a project. So if that person holds a lot of community support they have a bigger impact on voting for projects.

The members should also pass KYC and have publicly verifiable profiles for community to vote for them.

if your taking money from people, you should not expect to get a free ride. There should be some barrier, most likely some financial or otherwise to prevent every single token in existence from applying for verification. This should be a measure of community confidence or financial backing as surity.

We could possibly create a verification token for applying that can initially be bought with WCT - that’s how you would acquire it. There would perhaps be a min amount requirement of these tokens needed for verification and those tokens are used for applying for verification. To get verified, you will need to pass all the criteria and submit a x amount of the verification token. The board can get compensated perhaps for the paperwork and time by selling these verification tokens back to the projects.

Since the verification process takes time and effort and knowledge it should not be free, because you require other people to verify your application and verification status. Since I already have a contract with CIVIC for KYC for the gateway I would like to nominate myself perhaps to form part of this process. But of course verification applications cost me money so I would expect that cost to be covered by the applicants. I also dont mind hosting a website for the application process, and of course some compensation for the costs of this would be expected to come from verification applicants.

In any case, i would expect any person serving on this committee to have gone through a background check of some sorts with a publicly verifiable profile. We can create a nomination process and then the public can use WCT to vote for the nominee. You would possibly set a min requirement of votes or a wallet for votes with a min WCT to serve on the committee. If that person sells the WCT they would forfeit their position on the committee.Or perhaps control the WCT with a multi-signature wallet

Maybe it is possible to support a token with WCT like you do with leasing. Show this support in the dex when you surch for a token. So you get a better idea if you have the good token. Scamtokens still show up but i think a real project would allways get support because tokenholders benefit from it. At least you would see another token that has support so you have to check wich is the right project. You could also use a formule with the blocknummer of isuing the token so there is some firstgainer advantage.
This way i think you dont need a rhird party to control something.
Communitymembers could also issue there token to gain support for their trustworthiness.
You can still use the WCT to vote for other things because its still in your wallet.

I joined the Waves Platform for the semplicity to create a token in 1 minute.

The lack of recognition does not give a good impression to those approaching the platform and makes it difficult to develop a project.

But if we begin to make everything even more difficult, I think we will turn away entrepreneurs and investors.

Not everyone has the funds to do things right from the beginning. Sometimes we need to build slowly, step by step, with constancy and patience.

So let’s try to find a simpler solution that does not include judges with the power to kill a project in the bud.

We can not boast first of being able to “create a token with 1 WAVES” and after add more and much higher hidden costs.

What’s the difference from this proposal and just raising the cost for the creation of a token?

Remember that scammers always hold the funds to pay…

But this is just my point of view…

1 Like

I can partly agree with you on this however the token creation process and fee is still the same. It does not differ from how it is now. But if you want a ticker and a symbol (logo) like some old verified tokens do (WNET for example) you have to take some extra steps.

You can look at it like another exchange listing. If you want your token to be listed on an external exchange you also need to take some extra steps. The token is still always tradeable on the Waves DEX but if you want a ticker and symbol you have to take action and put your token up for vefication by community vote.

1 Like

Hello dears!
It is good news that you have decided to pay attention to this problem.
We are together ru.waves would like to propose the development of the DAO concept based on the WCT token.
We have already discussed this issue at a meeting with Inal in June and have mostly finalized the concept.
What is the concept:
For the user.:
Each user receives a case (set of tools) to participate in crowdfunding and voting in real time.
This case allows users to analyze, choose, get acquainted with the startup of interest, evaluate the maturity of the project, the community’s interest in it on the basis of current statistics.
Each owner of the WCT token has the right to vote, the number of tokens determines the weight of this vote. The owner can use the weight of his / her voice to support one or more projects and receive real-time rewards in the form of token accruals of the selected project, similar to how they receive a reward in leasing.
In addition, the user can analyze the rating of projects, evaluate the prospects of bonuses for votes and build whole investment strategies, which in turn is an additional motivation.
In addition to the case of the investor, the interested applicant can try himself in advayzer in its specifics, specializations, submit a project, perform tasks, and get the overall rating and reward from active campaigns.

For projects:
Every startup has the right to develop regardless of maturity.
The order receives a case that allows the project to get involved in the proposed concept.
The project publishes information about itself, attracts consultants, is being developed, consultants publish opinions getting a rating, users vote or even can buy ICO-type project tokens, and all this in real time. On the basis of the current processes, the project statistics metrics are formed, which is the basis of its overall rating.
By attracting users ’ votes or by contributing a share from WCT, the project declares itself in the community and depending on the volume of this share has the opportunity to contribute a proportional amount of its tokens for direct sale to users both on ICO and on the distribution of voting bonuses. Subsequent withdrawal of funds from the sale of tokens can be done by using ESCROW.
For the platform.
This concept is assumed on the basis of a number of template integrated solutions in the proposed projects \ startups of independent smart accounts, statistics on which are collected on a certain resource, and in an understandable form is presented to users in the form of a rating.
Each project and each consultant goes through the identification procedure during registration to access the cases and personal pages.The main mechanisms of the concept algorithms, profile data are protected by blockchain. The mechanisms that provide the UI interface are centralized to provide performance and updates.
As a result, this will allow to form a more transparent market of assets and labor on the platform. Volume growth network transactions. This will remove barriers to entry into the project market and risks for users ,crypto investors, as well as provide additional interest for job seekers and freelancers, developers and other market participants.
In addition to the above cases, this concept is an original solution for the promotion of projects. At the same time, you can implement a campaign promotion of any scale, from the sale of tickets to the theater to the assets in the business.

1 Like

Okee, what if when you make a token you also put in your ticker (unchangeable) and logo (changeable). You can ask a fee for it because you can assume that bigger or real project would invest in it. The only way the ticker or symbol shows up in the dex is when you meet certain requirements. Like, you need a minimum amount of throughput on the exchange, or you need an amount of WCT support or you need an amount of searches, etc. If you meet the requirements for say 2 weeks (is a bit funny, not) you gain the use for the ticker for 2 months. If the requirements fail for a period of 2 months you lose the use of the ticker and logo in the dex. After a period another project can use the ticker. Its only necessary that if the use changes this is very clearly shown in the dex .

We are working on such solution for about 6 month already. Prepared algorythms, mechanics, economy of tokens.
We proposed TrustAmust project for Waves Platform.

1 Like

I do not think a ticker and a logo make your project reliable if ALL tokens have it. :thinking:
Tickers and logos are part of the brand. Their presence should be a must!

The problem is when no token has them: all exchanges require a ticker and people don’t understand why it is missing…

In my opinion, the Waves Platform should consider remedying this gap and making it available for all tokens.

It will increase interest and reliability for Wave Platform tokens.

If you then want to ensure the projects worthy of trust, you can add a green tick. :white_check_mark:


Add green tick or do not add green ticker - decetralized voting should take place.
Thats where Trust Building Platform will come in.

Hmm I can’t totally agree.

Everyone must be responsible for their choices and must learn to use their brains.

We must not only trust the proclamations, but also look at the concrete facts, the goals achieved.
:loudspeaker: :checkered_flag::medal_sports:

If we invest in projects/coins just because someone else tells us, we are the only IR-responsible of our destiny. Stop believing blindly to those who ensure that a project of someone else is safe.
:wolf::fox_face::sheep::sheep::sheep::sheep::sheep::sheep::sheep: :smirk:

Furthermore, in my opinion, we risk favoring some projects to the detriment of others only because we can not recognize the potential of a project while another one has more funds, is able to publicize better, or there could be some hidden interests… :roll_eyes: :dollar:

Since January almost all currencies have lost at least 60-70% of their value. :chart_with_upwards_trend::chart_with_downwards_trend:
So you can say what you want, but in the end there are no safe projects. :x:

Sometimes we read “When moon?” :waning_gibbous_moon: Seriously…

This is not to believe in a project :+1: :muscle:, it is to look for easy profits. :bangbang:
If someone makes high profits, someone else has deep losses. And this is the raw truth. :slightly_frowning_face:

So, if we want to say it all, how many are here because they believe in a project and how many others are only improvised speculators?
Never forget that investments in cryptocurrencies are highly risky so what’s the point of complaining if you get scammed by more experienced speculators? :expressionless:

If you are not able to understand how to invest (don’t put alla the eggs in a basket, don’t invest money you can’t afford to lose, …) or in what to invest (i.e. because you don’t read whitepapers, you don’t mind to ask further info directly to the team, …), it is better to stay away from the world of cryptocurrencies.

In the end, verifications should be done by ourselves and not by relying on third parties. :male_detective:

As always, it is just my opinion…


IMO having a decentralized governing body to vote over token creation after they must have read through the project WP, website etc could be good. These persons could be anonymous and the vote could also be over a smart contract to avoid a project get desperate and buy all votes. Also allowing project community to vote with WCT could be good for Waves and WCT holders but could defeat the purpose of voting as a project/scammer could buy many WCT and use to influence vote

That’s why you should cap votes to a maximum weight to avoid whales from having too much power over votes.

1 Like

I was thinking the same

Giving the vote to WCT owners is like to put the power of decisions in the hands of few people or whales

What will prevent me from splitting tokens into multiple accounts in this case?