Signaling Proposal: Remove Unverified Status from Odin Protocol (ODIN)

Proposal Discussion
1

Voting

  • A YES vote means you support removing the unverified status from Odin Protocol (ODIN), allowing ODIN to appear on the Osmosis front end as a verified asset.
  • A NO vote means you want the unverified status for Odin Protocol (ODIN) to remain, keeping warning labels and extra steps for the token exchange.
  • A NO WITH VETO vote suggests you think this proposal could harm Osmosis, and the proposers should face penalties, including the loss of their deposit.

Background

Odin Protocol (ODIN) launched its cosmos chain in February 2022, focusing on building key elements for a data-driven economy. $ODIN has been traded exclusively on Osmosis (Pool #777). ODIN is the main staking token of our network, which will be supporting various applications, from data apps and DeFi to reward systems and data wallets.

One of our recent initiatives is the Wallace Wallet, accessible at Wallace Wallet (we are updating the web shortly). It’s a data wallet for users to share data for rewards anonymously.

We’ve begun a marketing campaign with Memob Tech, a leading data provider in the MENA region. This collaboration enhanced our capabilities by being able to sell this data for real $ and will start making Odin Protocol appealing to everyday users by showing the practical value of data.

Our commitment to building a decentralized and accessible data infrastructure is strong, aiming to enrich the Osmosis ecosystem by attracting more users and activities.

Problem to be Addressed

Currently, ODIN is labeled as “unverified” on Osmosis, which could mislead new incoming users, implying potential risks. This label, especially with our exclusive listing on Osmosis, could unfairly deter newcomers and slow Wallace / Odin growth.

Proposed Solution

We propose removing the unverified status from ODIN on Osmosis. ODIN has proven itself as a safe and reliable asset in our unique data economy. Removing this status will simplify the user experience and attract more participation in Odin Protocol and the Osmosis ecosystem.

Odin Protocol is developed by GeoDB, a registered company based in London, with a fully transparent and public team. GeoDB.

Links

1 Like
2

Honestly this shouldn’t require governance. @JohnnyWyles any way the team can open up a form for verification?

3

Odin has been running well for considerable period, with a strong community and very receptive development team. It should be able to continue to develop and evolve without the ‘unverified’ status.

4

I have asked if this can be reviewed/a form opened for future feedback.
The requirements are here:

At first glance I would say that ODIN doesn’t meet these criteria, the brand being the closest but the github repo is pretty much inactive and the twitter only started posting again recently.

5

Slowly but surely the protocol is finalizing its path to onboard their main product on their Data Oracle chain, the multi chain- data collecting and user rewarding “Wallace wallet”.
As the development has been mainly focused on the wallet, there haven´t been done a lot contributions to their Odin repo on git hub since. But that is not something, that, in my opinion, would make the project not legit. It shows me that they were able to focus their resources on the right direction and deliver the use case, before finally polishing the core product, which by the way should get its core update in a week or so, if I´m not wrong.

Seeing KUJIRA overtaking OSMOSIS by market cap, I guess Osmosis really should consider onboarding projects with real use cases instead of scaring them away because otherwise they might get left behind in the race of user and capital adoption, which I would like Osmosis to maintain. Odin Protocol really could use a helping hand

1 Like
6

I don’t think @JohnnyWyles tries to make it more difficult, but a lot clearer for projects what is needed to be in the “Verified” assets category.

I am very much a fan of these guidelines, since it makes conversations also a lot more structured. If I have to choose for a project to be verified which has been clearly building during the bear market looking at Github activity, communication and more I would feel much more comfortable than just believing a project on its word.

Being curious; why would you initially focus on the MENA region? If you are really focussing on web3, should you then not be focussing on areas where people are much more individualistic to start with and which are seeing as countries/regions where freedom is of a higher perceived level? And where the ability to owning your own data (if I understand the ODIN protocol correctly) might be more interesting and accepted?

7

For info, the listings team have added this form where a project can submit evidence for the verification process:

2 Likes
8

Thanks @JohnnyWyles

We have submitted the form with all relevant fields, Including screenshots of our internal repos with all the activities.

9

Odin has been running well for considerable period, with a strong community and very receptive development team. It should be able to continue to develop and evolve without the ‘unverified’ status.

10

Any update on the conversation on that part? Can we close this thread on the forum since the process will be done via another route?

11

Let´s maybe leave the option open to do an onchain/offchain proposal, just like teritori did, so that if bureaucracy part fails, we can do it over democracy.
There´s traction going on and it´d be a shame if this part will slow down a potentially successful project´s growth. Osmosis should treat projects that survived the crypto winter differently

12

Yeah, I guess it is also needed that there is some kind of expected duration when feedback can be expected.

This thread is now running since mid November. In 5-6 weeks we should be able to get some feedback on whether is has a chance of being verified, right?