[Proposal 856][VOTING] Funding the first inscription COSS on Cosmos

Change log 2023-12-01 Add Genisis Inscription Info 2023-11-29 Created initial post Summary: Proposal to request for 20000 ATOM from the community spending pool to funding the first inscription protocol (crc-20) on Cosmos. Details: COSS（crc-20）is designed to build an inscription system on cosmos. It will integrate trading, minting and a complete set of functions. Our team believes that in order to improve the ecosystem on cosmos we need to build an inscription system. Since cosmos doesn’t support smart contract, it’s a perfect fit for an inscription system to be built as a part of the existing ecosystem. Inscriptions will dramatically increase the utilization of Atom and bring in a lot of extra gas fees, making the cosmos chain assets more diversified. For this reason, after months of work we have created a crc-20 standard and will release the first version of the system in the next few days. Tasks: • Open inscription market, minting function, indexing function, transfer function • Create IBC function for inscriptions so that it can interconnect with other blockchains. • Use the funding provided on other cosmos chains to provide liquidity for inscription…

Excerpt (1199 of 2489 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

great idea! I believe that this will be a new power of cosmos! hahahhh…

The correct procedure involves initiating a pre-proposal discussion within the community forum before proceeding to an on-chain governance vote. This essential step allows for thorough debate, refinement of the proposal, and prevents potential waste of community time on numerous proposals. Since the proper pre-proposal process was not followed, our vote is regretfully against the current proposal. We strongly encourage you to foster discussion in the forum, ensuring a broader consensus before considering on-chain submission. Be prepared for possible VETO votes, as adherence to governance rules might not be lenient with other validators.

Good way to make sure your proposal fails is to immediately put it on chain without any discussion and ask for money.

coss:

Proposal to request for 20000 ATOM from the community spending pool to funding the first inscription protocol (crc-20)
on Cosmos.

Are you serious? Suddenly you write a post on the Cosmos Hub forum asking for 20,000 ATOM and the next day you put the proposal on-chain for voting? Also, after checking your website/twitter it looks very scammy, so we will vote No based on all this

You are requesting a fortune, without following the usual process, and you don’t even bother to provide details, actionable items, or a timeline.

Your website and documentation do not clarify your project either.

This won’t pass and as said above, may even receive a number of NWV.

Cosmic_Validator:

Are you serious? Suddenly you write a post on the Cosmos Hub forum asking for 20,000 ATOM and the next day you put the proposal on-chain for voting? Also, after checking your website/twitter it looks very scammy, so we will vote No based on all this

“next day” is a lie…more like 9 hours later

But more to the point, whats “inscription”?

And the Hub should fund this private chain, because the team “[will] explore the possibility of using inscription inconjunction with ICS” ?

Agree with the sentiment, though, just FYI, seems like Highstakes just voted YES on this proposal

Mintscan

Interchain explorer and analytics powered by Cosmostation.

Yes, High Stakes apparently can’t properly click on a button

My bad, resolved (and thanks for noticing)

When you write up a forum, please explain what an inscription is?

Follow governance protocols or expect no-votes.

Syed:

And the Hub should fund this private chain, because the team “[will] explore the possibility of using inscription inconjunction with ICS” ?

Maybe this Bitcoin Inscriptions & Ordinals | Galaxy

is this some kind of joke?

I’m hoping this is not the case, because we already have NFT’s in the ecosystem, so inscriptions would be a mute point. Also it would make for a heavier uatom and increased storage and lag on the chain especially because of Cosmos’s transactions per minute count.

“Inscriptions” can be thought of as equivalents to Bitcoin’s ordinals, similar to the recently released NEAT on NEAR. Instead of putting a load on the network, it can generate significant fees.

That’s pretty sad to hear that you decided to take the wrong path and also not including much more effort on the website and tech for a first thing to introduce on the Cosmos Hub.

We would love to help you providing a better and cleaner interface and to make it understandable and usable for our cosmonauts, please feel free to reach out in Twitter or Telegram (StakeLab or directly Zdeadex, our CEO)

For this proposal, we will be forced to vote No, but hope we can help you make it better for the next round.

Best regards.

Can you explain better what is it you’re trying to achieve? And who is the team exactly?

Decent example of how not to propose funding a new project.

Inscriptions systems is a clever solution to do minting in constraint execution systems like Bitcoin. It’s complexity doesn’t make sense for Cosmos based blockchains, nor for other high performance blockchains. Recent release of NEAT on NEAR showed nothing but FOMO, putting the network (and all ecosystem, including indexers etc…) under the stress, some apps were not functional.

Based on this proposal, we still don’t know what will be the value of the COSS. Who will be in charge of minting? How decentralized it will be?

As I understand the mechanisms of “Insriptions”, it will be sort of layer-2 without layer-1 validation (at least in Bitcoin there is no on chain mechanism to slash for misconduct).

So, without clear analysis of: added value , information who will be an authority in the system, and how the decisions will be make, this proposal should be STRONGLY REJECTED.

PS: Cosmos systems have smart contracts: any Cosmos SDK based chain can integrate Cosmwasm, EVM or program directly using Cosmos SDK modules.

Importantly, the association of an inscription with an individual sat (ordinal) is based on an off-chain methodology for cataloging individual satoshis which must be adhered to and agreed upon by participating nodes for any such connection between inscription and ordinal to “exist” in any meaningful sense. While inscriptions themselves are posted into actual blockchain data and are there for all full archival nodes to see, instantiating, supporting, and believing the existence of ordinals themselves requires social consensus.

source

image1100×464 44.3 KB

image853×955 79.2 KB

With all the reasons mentioned by others, we will vote No.