RE: Establish an Exchange Fund to Pursue an SPS listing on Binance
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
Edited on 3/18 based on the changes made.
I will now support this proposal because I'm thrilled that we handled the 2 biggest potential problems.
I believe the will of the community is to move forward with the tier 1 listing on Binance, and I want to support that process now too. I'm thrilled that there was great dialogue and a sincere effort to handle the biggest issues each side had (as shown in the various amendments).
Thanks to the proposal writer for listening, and I look forward to many more proposals like this in the future. We can achieve more working together, and this proposal should be a lesson for all!
--------------------------------------------
Previous comments for the record
If the SPS DAO doesn't protect its funds any better than this, then we will never succeed.
If this passes then we will pump and I will be gone for sure. I won't stick around for the following crash.
An even worse scenario is we don't pump and have $2.5m less in the DAO and are struggling to regain credibility that we won't waste money in the future. Which of course would be doubtful.
I urge everyone to fully think through why we should vote for this.
We have built a strong community that has faith that we will build a strong game, why rip that up in order to help a few people get liquidity so they can dump the token because they are impatient?
Remember that we aren't all going to "get out". So if you think this is the way forward to get you more money because you are tired of waiting, then realize there are people here with millions of dollars invested too and they are not blind or stupid.
If this passes it would be one of the few things that would make me want to leave. I ask you to ask others how they would feel too, you might find we have very few people left if this actually passed and was implemented.
Just my opinions, I will see what everyone else votes and react accordingly of course.
Well said, Dave!
IMO we are a crypto game first and foremost, that means we need to be where the crypto people are and we will never break into the top 200 projects if we dont get on major exchanges. Axie had like a 9 billion dollar MC last Bullrun, thats like a 7$ SPS if we could do the same but we have to be listed on these major exchanges so its not just our strong community but also folks that speculate on lots of projects with no intention of ever interacting with the ecosystem.
Also Love Ya Dave <3 you're amazing
I dunno how many sps have been burned so far, but a three billion issuance at $6 would be $18 billion, which may be pushing it a bit!
I love ya too Hewitt and normally on the same page. I disagree that we will never break into the top 200 projects if we don't get on the major exchanges. No one will be able to stop us when we develop a system where people are constantly seeking to buy more assets. Our tokenomics are set up properly now, but we still have to create the "desire to buy assets" or better known as more demand.
Its ok we disagree. And thank you for being such a great community member always Hewitt!!!
You know what all the coins in the top 200 have in common? All but a hand full are on either coinbase or binance. The hand full that dont have like 3 pages of other lesser exchanges instead. The number of people that will watch KillerWhales or any other influencer type content and just brainlessly buy the tokens that the "whales" talked favorably about would surprise you but if its 7 steps or only available on an exchange they dont use they will just skip our project. Outside holders arent a bad thing and IMO a higher sps price, for higher earnings, would do more for gaining players than any story or mission Nate can cook up.
I know we are a top 200 project with top 5 developers but we have to be the places and do the things those top 200 projects do to actually climb there. We literally do everything better than 90% of the projects out there but nobody knows about us because we are stuck in a tiny pond. If Hive wasnt listed on Binance it would be sub .01 cent and would be dragging SPL down even further.
I think you are a great guy Hewitt and I love the optimistic view. I hope if it passes it works as you say.
I don't want to be the guy that rains on the parade, that's not really my style. I just think every decision should be viewed from a "what happens if we are right? and a what happens if we are wrong?" point of view.
While I have great hopes for the future and the potential of the game, I see lots of things that could go wrong that delay or derail that potential success if this vote passes. I don't see such risk if this vote doesn't pass.
Obviously more people agree with you than me and that's ok of course. I'm only one person and have been wrong many times in the past.
Hello Dave.
Splinterlands is based on hiveblockchain which is very very niche, which means it is very hard to get NEW exposure, not just for Splinterlands but also for the SPS token.
Sure you can go ahead and say SPS is available plenty, just use pancakeswap or something similair - but lets be honest here... ETH-based games has by far outperformed BSC-based games (and hive-based games for that matter).
I remember back in 2021, where I looked at SPS and compaired it to Axie Infinity. Axie had a $9.8B marketcap at the top, where SPS only had a $155M, and why is that? It is surely not because Axie Infinity is just a better game? In my opinion, that is for sure not the case. I strongly believe it has been all about exposure and opportunity and SPS is STILL lacking behind in that front.
I do believe the timing is right for a tier 1 listing, we are in an ongoing raging bullmarket and Aggroed has just been featured with Splinterlands on Hello labs, which is showing huge upside potentiel! Eyes are on us and new people need a way to invest easily - Making them either go to Hive or use pancakeswap after adding BSC-network to their metamask simply wont do...
Now, I am all for a casual discussion, so if you don't agree with what I am writing, then what are your thoughts on "how to get new eyes/exposure on Splinterlands while also making it easy for them to invest".
Maybe I am missing a key perpespective, so I am looking forward to your (or any others) response. :)
Personally I have never understood the appeal of Axie, as a game or an investment, although the way it enabled a lot of people to earn a living was impressive and inspiring. Its valuation was bonkers though.
I play Splinterlands literally every day and am quite well invested in it, so I have a stake in its future. I am also a binance and coinbase user but don't and wouldn't use them for investing in any small game token. Hive is already on Binance by the way, so there is a fairly simple path to it now.
Axie allowed Filipinas ppl to have an income because it was a ponzi. The game sucks, the team was driven only for short time gains and the ponzinomics were awful.
Splinterlands is not even comparable, it plays in another league of incentives, game theory and tokens flywheel. It is the finest I have seen, and I've seen something on my life.
Good point on the Hive onboarding from Binance, if the newcomer experience is good enough a new player should not need Binance in first instance, only when looking to compose his assets he would need to go outside Splinterlands, tipically to Hive-Engine and eventually reaching Binance. By that time I think we will have more DeFi and other products around. Im pro-proposal but if it doesn't pass the world is not ending.
Hey @xensational I appreciate the thoughtful comment. I responded to Michealb above with a lengthy reply that would be helpful to answer a lot of the things in my mind.
I understand your points but I don't agree with some of your premises. I don't think we are ready for a tier 1 listing yet, both in terms of our ability to retain new players and in our capitalization (we would be giving up too high of a % of our assets to literally just be listed). To me its a hail mary approach (reactive) if done at this time, as opposed to a planned part of a long term growth agenda.
Finally when comparing SPL to other games, then I think many factors are relevant. One is "who is backing them" and what are their plans?
I think you will find big money behind the Axie Project. They succeeded not because of their game, but because the money behind them. We have no such money behind our project. At least not yet.
So until we get the money from the people that are in the "big time", then we will not have the same impact as projects that do have that money. Its just the way the world works. Some people think that big investors jump behind a project because they somehow found it randomly on coinbase, but that's not how it works at all.
The big money that backs a project will never be random about anything. They will extract a lot of value and demand a lot of things to put their money to work. So we won't be attracting that kind of money with a listing no matter how many times people repeat that message on discord today. The players we will attract are the small fries and the momo chasers that want the action. While attracting any kind of new money is fine, I would definitely question the long term value of what we end up with our $2.5m investment.
I appreciate again the thoughtful response and I will live with this vote no matter how it turns out. I definitely don't agree with it at this time, but I do respect that many have a different opinion and support their right to have it.
I appriciate you taking the time to respond Dave.
I don't think this is an easy vote at all, I see alot of upside potential with getting more eyes on Splinterlands itself but I also 100% understand your point of view that it might be too early and that we are not ready yet and that this will just artificially pump bags for those who want to get out at a favorable price.
With that said, I personally think the timing couldn't be better, in the sense that the bullmarket is underway. My thinking is, even though we might not be ready that it is still worth while - alternatively, we end up being ready in 1 year (just an example) for a tier 1 listing but then have hit a bearmarket, which brings very little new money into any ecosystems resulting in a tier 1 listing not being worth 'anything'...
There is a fine line in between for sure!
We will see what happens and no matter what, I wont be mad and I will still be sticking around. :)
We will definitely see and everyone has their own way to view things. That's what I love about the DAO process, people that have stake will decide this. So win or lose, the process will give our community what they wanted. Even if its not what I wanted, I definitely appreciate the process.
I'm glad you see both sides and I'm not upset at all that we are voting differently on it.
ps... regarding your point about you sticking around. I made an opposite statement yesterday and stated I would be selling my assets into such a pump. While that is true for many reasons outlined throughout the post comments, I do want to say that I'm not trying to do anything more than be honest. I'm just one player though, and I appreciate everyone voting for what they think it right, and wouldn't have it any other way!
Dave, you're a stalwart of the community and I respect you for giving it to me straight & not pulling any punches. :-)
A couple things here:
I don't want a major exchange listing because I want exit liquidity. I live in a place where Binance isn't even allowed; I couldn't pass KYC on it if I wanted to. My SPS is going to remain safely staked and in liquidity pools for years to come. I suspect most big whales are diamond hands at this point, and I have faith they will not take advantage in that way. If any do sell out, well, better to flush them out sooner rather than later anyway.
We need to focus on the investment side of the game just as much as the game side of the game. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. The game should offer a little something for everyone. Gamers should have a fun, engaging, solid game to play. But an investment mindset is also welcome. People can stake tokens, rent out their SPS, earn passively from Land, etc. We've got the best of both worlds, and getting on a top tier exchange is a natural extension of that.
I don't expect to convince you though. You just go on being you, Dave, we're lucky to have you!
I live in Houston Texas. Binance is illegal here, however I can still sell all my assets by other means. Not saying I will do it.
Point is listing at what cost? 2M ? 3?
That is selling SPS DAO holds at market. What if market doesn't have the appetite to absorb it? What kind of investment decision is that?
Again getting back to "investing". I have done more investing than most professional money managers do in their entire life, so when you say investment side of the game I say, it is not our job. I like Splinterland company to do some good investment decisions.
1st I miss you in discord <3
2nd Go Houston Texas <3
3rd Respectfully we cant have it both ways where we(the sps holders) control the game(like the bot ban in modern) but then expect an already cash strapped company to shell out 2 mil for a listing.
Also we all know SPL is a top 200 project EASY. We have far better devs and community members than most of the top 200 so whats stopping us? Well all but a handful are on those 2 major exchanges... If you add KuCoin I couldnt find a single top 200 project that wasnt on 1 of the 3.
Thank you for the kind words. I am always here and always watching. It's not that easy to get rid of me ;)
That said, I don't think game makers, SL company can afford the $2M for listing today or in 6 months. That's my point.
But if you or others think DAO can afford it, you would be right. However, I am a practical guy, I know who the stakeholders are and how will they vote. I am telling you this doesn't have the votes to pass
Thank you for the compliment @soy-misterioso :)
I addressed my issues deeper below in michaelb's comment, but I will comment on your two points briefly.
On number 1, I think you will be very surprised at how many players with diamond hands will sell into something they feel is not natural. Its human nature. People can live with things as they are and have "hope" for the future, but if you give them an artificial pumped up price then quite a few will rethink their investment if you change the dynamic by 3x, 5x or even 10x.
Put another way, all of the issues that people are salty about will still exist, like land too slow, leaderboards, bots, etc etc etc. The only difference is people would be much closer to a price they planned on. I'm quite confident the better the result of the pump, the more destabilizing it would be to those diamond hands.
On number 2, I'm all for creating opportunities for investors too. I'm not upset about the implications for the gamers. I'm concerned this will create an artificial situation that will lead to the displacement of long term holders and replaced by short term crypto flippers and a whole new cycle of bagholders.
While this would be great for those that sell, I don't think it would be a great atmosphere soon after the pump gets its hangover. This would be worse than the last time it pumped because most of us still around didn't exit. I believe anything artificial and it will have the opposite reaction this time.
I appreciate the kind words and know you mean well. I also think this might pass even though I hope it doesn't. If it does though, I won't run around and be salty or anything, and in fact I will do quite well personally.
I will simply be disappointed because I feel we are making a big mistake and I believe that once its done it will take many years to undo, and possibly lead to even worse outcomes if things don't go as expected. I think the risk of this going forward is much higher than just the $2.5m from the DAO.
Again thanks for the civil conversation and I appreciate your desire to make things happen (even if we disagree on them).
@davemccoy do you think we should ever get on binance /coinbase?
i think we should for more reasons then one, yeah might have been better to do it when SPS was $1.00 but this proposal lasts for 365 days. With a little luck maybe it wont turn out to be as expensive as currently presented.
Micheal, first thank you for asking. I think getting on binance or coinbase is great if it happened naturally because we meet the qualifications like in the real world exchange listings. The 7 issues I have are:
One (1) spending $2.5 million to be listed on each of their exchanges is a form of payola. I think the whole concept of paying such a large amount to gain access is questionable legally in general.
Two (2) I realize the purpose of this for a lister is to give "value" to the listing company's token, but the reality is most companies our size and scale are simply listing to get a "pump" in price. Some of those companies can translate the attention via a pump into legit customers and participants in their ecosystem; however a large % of those listing companies are simply using this as a liquidity opportunity. (either to raise funds or exit bad investments for their large stakeholders).
Three (3) I'm not happy at all at spending close to 100m SPS to get this kind of exposure. Even if I felt that the first 2 issues could be overcome, I still would be unhappy with using $2.5m in DAO funds to provide a pump so people can exit at a higher price. If they want to exit, then I think that's fine but spending $2.5m of our treasury funds to get them a higher price is not something I feel is good.
Four (4) We still haven't created a user experience that will retain the new customers we get. So I think any marketing expenses at this time are a big waste because we aren't finished with solving the problems we had the last time. We have already shown exactly what happens when we bring a lot of people in and then can't retain them at a reasonable rate. So I would be against spending any money that would result in no net gain over anything more than a short term pop in players.
Five (5) There's no analysis at all by the proposal, which gives us no useful information as to what to expect. We only have arguments such as "this is a new world, go big or go home" or "this is crypto and we have to adapt to the new rules or die". Or worse, "all the other crypto companies are doing it, if we don't then we will never gain acceptance".
On point number 5, if players were told it cost $25m or even $250m, they would still be able to apply the same logic and make the same arguments. So does that mean that any amount requested is ok to spend? Does the DAO not care about being good allocators of their capital?
Six (6) We will lose credibility to the outside world as well as to ourselves if we make a decision based on the 5 points above. If we end up getting 2/3rds to support such a proposal, then it would say a lot about our future in my opinion.
It would say to me that we the DAO don't care if this is ethical, if we are artificially creating a pump , if we waste DAO funds to do it, and if we do not do any actual real analysis. Further it would say to me that many people are looking for an easy exit liquidity event. Obviously that's not everyone, but it would be the only way I could justify such a decision (if I didn't care about the DAO funds and just wanted a higher price to get liquid).
Seven (7) Finally, I think it would rip apart the long term player base that has held this community together for so long through 2 brutal bear markets. I am positive I would sell out if this type of artificial pump occurred, and I'm sure there would be many others that would as well. They might not admit it, but I believe you would have a ton of exits created by this. IMO, this would be a far different community after such an event if it doesn't happen naturally and when the time is proper.
Again I note that I don't mind people selling, I do mind spending our precious DAO funds to get them a better price if they want to leave.
Finally if we have our act together with the new player experience and we are retaining players we get, and we are not giving away SPS at $0.03, but instead its at $1 as you suggested, then I think we would have the funds to take a chance. The reasons are #1 is less of a % of our assets, #2 we would be ready to capitalize on the investment, and #3 by definition we have proved our worth to the investment world because our token went up without any artificial means. That makes us legit imo, and THEN an investment into the bigtime would carry the proper credibility. (its why many small companies stay private before listing in the real world stock market exchanges)
So Michael, I could deal with some of these negatives if they weren't so many. But in my eyes this is clearly not the right time to do this, and I would be scared of what will happen as a result.
ps... I had some people question me about why I would "threaten to quit" if it passes. I'd like to draw the distinction versus people that routinely throw "fits" and try to extort a vote their way. . I'm not mad at anyone if it passes, nor will I lose out if it happens. In fact I think in 2024 I will make far more if this passes. I won't gaslight people and taunt them if it passes, nor will I be salty or sour.
I will simply be disappointed that it passed because I believe I know the ramifications, and for me those ramifications will be a change in what I do every day and what I've cared about for the last 6 years. But I won't be salty or negative, I will still wish everyone the best and hope I was wrong so everyone after me will still do really well.
A lot of good points Dave.
Could it be as simple as give the DAO the authority to spend $ on a listing but not until certain criteria met? We have 365 days to run this.
edit: I dont understand how exchanges work and why they are able to charge the $ they do, but apparently they do.
I agree that would make a lot more sense. If the criteria were conditional, then we could alleviate a lot of uncertainty and make a more informed decision.
And the time idea is a good one too, we need to do it on our schedule as opposed to rushing something through just because it seems like a good thing at the moment.
ok so where from here?
Here's my thoughts Micheal:
If we pass it as is, then I doubt there will be much negotiation. Here's why:
The people pushing hard on this seem very motivated and any change to it will likely lead them to lose some support.
The people against this will not be angry, but instead start mapping out their reactions based upon how they think it will play out.
If we don't pass as is, then I think it will depend on how close it is.
If its close then I think both sides will try to find the reasonable people on each side to craft some compromises. Whether a compromise can be found will depend on the group of people involved doing the negotiations.
I do think there's a lot of people that are pushing for this for various reasons, but I also think the people against it (like me) are concerned for valid reasons. So if we can work together in a mature manner, then I think a gap of 5 to 10% swing either way would be possible.
If its not close to passing, ie greater than 15% away, then I think in order to get this done then there could still be negotiations, but I think it would take a serious effort by the supporters to understand why the large voters have objections (and address them).
I also think if fails and its not close, it would be a good idea to get input from Yabapmatt on the topic as well, so that we can understand his point of view too and make sure we aren't wasting our time.
I personally don't mind us talking about it and think it would be possible to find scenarios where it would make sense. I don't think all those that will vote "no" here would always vote "no". So I do think there's a chance for a compromise, but my belief at this time is we will likely need to see the vote finish before we know how best to approach a compromise.
ok. So with the proposal in its current form i'm gunna vote NO.
ok cool. I hope the proponents reach out to you for your thoughts, and feel free to contact me anytime as well about the topic. I think something as big as this should have serious discussions.
Thanks again for taking the time to discuss Micheal! And have a terrific weekend too :)
I'd be happy to make some adjustments to the pre-proposal if you feel there are some tweaks that can be made to get some current "no" or "on-the-fence" people to vote "yes".
If you come up with some concrete recommendations before the pre-proposal period is finished, let me know via another comment here.
i just read your updates provided - nice!
So i think this will fail if the 2.5 million of it has to come from SPS at 3c. At 10c i think it will pass (or just offer stable coins if we have the available budget)
Another thought would be to take out coinbase have only Binance listing on the proposal?!
On a side note possibly looking at running another proposal for the DAO to sell off SPS at 10c to build up exchange funds. These funds could then be added to help pay for this. clayboyn has some good wording on this :)
Thanks for your input. I'll give it some thought and decide if I want to update the proposal again.
I do agree that selling SPS at 10c feels better than selling at 3c, but we don't know how long it will take for it to get back to 10c. Could be quite a while. However some separate proposal to lay out a strategy for converting funds does sound reasonable.
ok , i edited my text a few times so hopefully you read the last cut lols
Hi @davemccoy I'm not following your logic on point #7 where you say.
"Seven (7) Finally, I think it would rip apart the long term player base that has held this community together for so long through 2 brutal bear markets. I am positive I would sell out if this type of artificial pump occurred, and I'm sure there would be many others that would as well. They might not admit it, but I believe you would have a ton of exits created by this. IMO, this would be a far different community after such an event if it doesn't happen naturally and when the time is proper.
Again I note that I don't mind people selling, I do mind spending our precious DAO funds to get them a better price if they want to leave."
I mean you just said that you were going to sell and therefore would be included in that group exiting because it's at a higher price point but then you go on to say you don't want to provide an opportunity for people to leave at a higher price point although you just said that's the very reason you would leave. I mean otherwise you would remain. Am I misunderstanding your logic here?
first things have changed since there has been changes made to the proposal.
But I think where you are missing things is I don't think the DAO should be spending money to give anyone (include me) and exit opportunity. I would've sold if we created an artificial situation where we couldn't have recovered (meaning flawed proposal).
But now with the changes made, and also discussing with others options to addressing another one of my concerns, then I'm comfortable enough to vote for this as its clear a lot of people want to see a listing on Binance.
I appreciate your response and just re-read the amendments. Also listened to your entire conversation with Aftersound. One step forward I would say!
I agree. And thank you for the responses too Shaddrak!
Let it pump, and swap $10m dollars worth into stable coins during the pump? DAO ends up far superior than before…. No brainer especially when you say you know itll go up.
I doubt the DAO will be able to sell $10 million worth before it dumped. So while I think it will go up, the DAO would have a very hard time monetizing anything as the dump would quickly follow a pump.
Dave, how else are we going to expose Splinterlands to capital? Im all for other suggestions. Capital is NOT moving to HIVE blockchain…. Unless you can show me differently. We are not getting VC funding. Our chain has failed to innovate in ways that attract capital in this space. Therefore it is up to us to do it…. We can continue to improve the game at a slow pace…. Thats great and all but unfortunately the best product doesnt always win out just by virtue of being the best. In this industry, youve got to fight hard for visibility…. The “sit back and wait” mentality will lead to our eventual demise. I cant allow that to happen.
I think your heart is in the right spot, but I don't believe this is the way. I have given many reasons why in this post as replies, particularly in the post reply to michealb.
Its ok if we disagree and its even ok if this passes without me. If the community feels that a hail mary approach has to happen, then it will vote this way.
I personally am not in a rush and feel that we will have no trouble attracting investors when we give them something attractive to purchase. But don't forget that we daily get reminders of all of our flaws by Mavs in discord, and these will not go away just because we get a Tier 1 listing.
To take this approach that its now or never is very risky in my opinion. I can understand why people want to do that, 6 years is a long time to be in a situation (even one that has done as well as Splinterlands).
I respect that you are doing what you feel is right though and as I've said to others, if this happens then I will make our really well too. I just understand fully what it means for me.
No matter what way this goes I will always want to see the people here be as happy as possible, I appreciate the experience and have much respect for many people on both sides of this vote!
Not many people will see what you're saying here but I do. If this passed I'd sell everything into the pump because I would fully expected a long, slow, and painful decline to follow. It's what happens to almost every token that gets listed on Coinbase. Quick pump followed by a long decline.
SPS was designed so that the price would match its in game utility. If SPS price moves meaningfully higher than its utility demands, we would have a quick pop of everything in the game followed by a very long hangover as we dealt with the imbalances the pop caused.
You absolutely get it @imno ... I love that you do! Thanks for putting it in better words that maybe will help others understand it too!
It's not about whether we pump or not. SPL needs a T1 exchange to reach a greater audience whether u think we're ready or not!
At the rate the team is going, they'll never be ready!
Look at the childish responses from azircon and gank... quit if we get listed? I say good riddance, less toxicity in the community. I see u feel the same? LMAO
We don't know the price, our bloody DAO manager hasn't spoken to any exchange representatives recently. It just shows where he stand, in addition to this proposal not even being DAO sponsored. He's suppose to be NEUTRAL, not just listen to people he think are whales or important!
We don't even have to talk about new players! Existing players are discouraged from investing more with their gains from elsewhere because SPL is falling behind other games and Dapps..FAST. No one is going to be interested in investing in a (mini) card game on a dead chain like HIVE! Why would a new player risk playing Splinterlands when other games are on Binance? Why would someone try Splinterlands when other games now have larger communities being on EVM compatible chains?
If you truly believe this game can 100x organically, whatever price now would be a drop in the bucket! Do u think SPL can afford a listing when it's ready when the market outgrows and other games/dapps outpace SPL? Any "HIGH" price now would probably be much HIGHER in a bull market.
I have never seen projects die after getting listed on Binance, only projects being delisted due to lack of development! Matt needs to seek funds from elsewhere and not just the DAO! Not funds from another card sale brought forward!
I agree with you Dave, thank you as always for your insight and effort towards making this a better game and better crypto project!
My simple dumb thoughts from a salty German are - as long as we can not manage to create fun around the game itself (not mentioning new disasters of pre sales push and shove stuff in the ecosystem here) we alway will lag behind (we do not get new players, and i give it one season to evaluate new ranked pays off or improves palyer experience, it is boring, even SPL fanboys these days are not happy with tournaments and ranked - while i do expect changes on ranked +20 stuff related to opponents at least), even in bull times we seem to be the only gaming token that has no or if at all small increase - i am not repeating why i thing this is the case (not related to DAO itself though)
no sure how you voted Uwe. But I do agree that we still have a ways to go to retain players. We are making progress, but until we get there, we aren't there.
did not vote, as i did not vote any proposal since a while :-)
The main mission of the DAO is not "protect" the "funds" as if we are talking about a widows's endowment, is to promote the game with the best of their ability and resources.
Of course the main reason for listing in Binance is to promote the game and allow newcomers to easily onboard Splinterlands, suggesting that this is promoted by whales looking for exit liquidity is a really cheap gaslightning, is literally the opposite; whales are doing this psyop (to ruin and mud the proposal) looking desperately not to lose their grip on the game, which is sad and annoying 50%/50%. But rest assured that everybody is now aware of who wants what and why.
And opening and closing the comment with threatens of leaving the game...
I don't want to get personal (I don't know you at all and there is no reason why you are not an excellent person) so I just will say, noone is more important than the whole. I will be happy if some disgruntled whale leaves and dumps their SPS bag and drag us to 1 cent. The sooner they leave, the better for the game long term.
My 2 decs.
ok cool. You didn't want to get personal, but you did :D
Its ok, you can think what you want!