I would love to see this on the hub sooner than later. Although i have few questions for the bAssets and these are being staked to validators.
2 Likes
Yes.
We work with trusted validators on every chain we produce an LST on.
2 Likes
Once wallet approval quite quickly.
I’ve been interested in the intersection of art, narrative, and creative defi ever since the Lion DAO brought together survivors of the Terra crash to rebuild and chart out a new course for the beleaguered community.
One of Lion DAO’s earliest partners was BackBone Labs, whose NFT platform Necropolis minted our flagship collection, the pixeLions. BBL has been at the forefront of aligning artwork with novel defi incentives in the form of NFTfi from the beginning. BBL has now built one of the most far-reaching and interesting NFTfi ecosystems in the Cosmos and is looking to expand those services even further with their Prop 1001 to whitelist the LST $bATOM.
Prop 1001 doesn’t ask for funds from the community, it simply seeks clearance to deploy on the Cosmos Hub products BBL has already built and fine-tuned on their own.
What BBL has created already on multiple Cosmos chains is a layered, gamified, NFT-governed value flywheel powered by yield, royalties, airdrops, and community development across the Cosmos. The Lion DAO and the pixeLions DAO fully support BBL’s proposed expansion into the CosmosHub with $bATOM and we encourage everyone to do the same on this proposal.
2 Likes
Hi @BackBone_Labs , we’re all very excited to see your team join the community and contribute to the Hub! However, this prop is incorrectly formatted and would remove the previously allow-listed addresses for ICL, DAO DAO and ARK Protocol. This would break things for us.
There are also developments around the Hub’s future VM & CW and I suggest we hop on a call before your team spends significant resources building a product on top of CW. I’ll DM you on Twitter 
6 Likes
We have booked a call.
1 Like
This being the case, folks should vote No on proposal 1001.
1 Like
POSTHUMAN votes NO on Proposal #1001
Not because of BackBone, but because this prop is incorrectly formatted and would remove the previously allow-listed addresses
We are waiting for new correct proposal, and we will vote YES
To all validators, who voted YES: please, revote to NO, this proposal is incorrect