To the Cosmos and Beyond

in blurt •  6 months ago  (edited)


Many of you may have heard ramblings over the months about Blurt moving to Cosmos, this has been a side-discussion for some time now. I wish to set the record straight on what is and what isn't possible at this stage, as well as what is prudent and a safe path forward.

Firstly I wish to preface this by, why limit Blurt to just Cosmos? There is a whole crypto universe out there that Blurt can conquer. Same as USDT exists on many chains like Ethereum, Tron, Omni etc, so too can Blurt.

@zahidsun recently gave me some intel that Scorum (a sporting offshoot of Bitshares) also suffered low liquidity and priced similar to Blurt, with recent lows cited at 0.0029 USD according to Coingecko.

After a listing on Pancakeswap on Binance, the SCR token price bounced up to 0.008 USD and is realising daily trade volumes of between $32k and 200K according to @zahidsun.

Scorum can now be exchanged on the user-friendly Pancakeswap interface:

The same sort of DEX opportunity exists on Cosmos, there are two current active DEXes and, the Gaia Gravity DEX is in the works as well.

Cosmos is a good choice because @jacobgadikian is familiar with the Cosmos-SDK codebase and will be able to navigate launching Blurt there.

A recent information gathering post from Jacob has left a few questions from the community, I will try to put to bed some concerns.

What will happen to native Blurt?

The biggest concern has been raised is what will happen to Graphene Blurt as it exists today and all the exchange listings and goodwill it currently has?

Basically, nothing has to happen to it, depends on how we structure the expansion into Cosmos Blurt.

There are three possible ways it can happen:

1. Move Blurt balances over on 1:1 claimdrop

This method assumes a total shift to Cosmos and all users will be given time to claim new Cosmos accounts. In my opinion, this method is risky and I would prefer a parallel approach where Blurt exists on multiple chains, same as Scorum and LEO exist natively and on the Binance Smart Chain. Personally, I wouldn't be in favour of a blanket move to Cosmos or any other chain, I think we can still get the best of both worlds, if Blurt launching on another chain causes native Graphene Blurt to hardly be used in future, then we can have the discussion of deprecating it.

To be able to expand to another chain in parallel, without moving the entire balance sheet across there are some supply-side considerations, I propose the following two methods for discussion.

2. Parallel Launch using unclaimed exchange airdrops

It has been a topic of internal discussion that most exchanges didn't take up the Blurt airdrop and the funds are sitting idle on the blockchain, reducing the vested stake proportion and thus the output of the rewards pool which now is dynamic to vested stake.

I would take a rough guess this idle unclaimed airdrops totals around 80 million Blurt without doing any investigation.

The proposal is to issue a hard fork that would burn these unused balances after a 30 day notice period being given to the affected exchanges via email to either list Blurt or have the funds burned.

The same amount would then be minted on a new Cosmos Blurt chain, partly as fuel for funding swap pool incentives and partly distributed to everyone who attested as per the instructions on this post:

In this model the Blurt supply would remain unchanged at circa 400 Million coins and a portion of idle supply shifted to the new chain on Cosmos.

3. Parallel Launch using additional BLURT mint

This proposal allows for the further expansion into multiple chains like BSC, Ethereum, Tron etc. While proposal #2 is good for a one-hit wonder, this proposal keeps on giving and allows for the expansion of Blurt to other chains by minting and distributing additional BLURT on the target chain.

This can of course be tempered to the demand for the Blurt currency itself and new minting for additional chains after Cosmos are only done once we can see the market can support the new mint.

There is an illusion that total supply influences coin price, while that is partly true on a macro-economic perspective, it also is true that you can have a low supply cap coin with 100K max supply and still be worth nothing because it has a weak use case or poor distribution and demand.

This third method can also be a combination of #2 burning unclaimed exchange stake in conjunction we a new mint to supplement swap pool rewards.

@michelangelo3 brought up some good questions which I will answer briefly.

Will the Blurt Power be transferred to the new chain?

This depends on which of the above three models we choose, and totally open for discussion, Jacob's post was more of an information-gathering post and nothing is definitive, we want to get community input and will mobilise around a collectively defined idea.

Which accounts will be transferred?

Again this depends on the model, if #2 and #3 above are implemented, no accounts will be transferred, but rather everyone who has attested their Cosmos account will get a prorated share of the Cosmos mint.

If option one is utilised then the idea would be that everyone would be given time to claim their new account on the Cosmos Blurt replacement chain.

Who will develop the new chain?

@jacobgadikian would be the lead developer on Cosmos and likely we would get other Cosmos community devs involved which brings new talent to Blurt, only a handful of devs can develop on the current Graphene chain, but Cosmos opens up to a much wider development community.

Who are the witnesses/validators?

On Cosmos they are referred to as validators, the Cosmos witness set can be the same Blurt witness set and likely both chains can run on the same Raspberry Pi or VPS server. Anyone will be free to launch a validator.

Is there still a reward pool or just tips?

We have seen on projects like WLS and that once the initial sponsored tip jar is empty, the interest in tipping wanes when the public have to use their own funds to tip, tipping can be included even on native Blurt as a supplement to blockchain rewards, but we don't believe tipping is a viable replacement.

If option #1 is chosen and Blurt moved in its entirety to Cosmos then a rewards pool will have to be developed, this is another reason why I personally prefer a parallel approach to test the waters first, I'm a fan of a slow transition that doesn't break things.

If option #2 or #3 is selected then no rewards pool would be needed, native Blurt will exist for that and later a bridge can be created between native Blurt and Cosmos Blurt. Blurt will exist on the Cosmos chain and possibly BSC and others too for the purpose of creating liquidity pools and for greater visibility in other markets, the rewards will still be generated on native Blurt.

What will the frontend look like?

If option #1 is selected it would be a brand new frontend, built on modern tooling and totally not Condenser. No designs have been discussed as yet but a designer would be employed to mockup something the community can then help tweak. This will again take time and why a parallel approach is prudent, so the new frontend can be tested while the old still exists.

If we choose option #2 or #3 a new frontend is not needed but is desirable to build anyway.

When could the change be made?

My personal opinion is that migrating Blurt in its entirety would be a 6 month plus endeavour.

Option #2 or #3 could be done likely faster within a 3-month timeframe, allowing at least 30 days to notify exchanges if we intend to burn the unclaimed funds.

Do we keep the name Blurt, or is Blurt then called Beach? By the way, Beach as a blockchain with sand as cryptocurrency is a nice idea. I want to go to the beach... ;-)

Yes, we will keep the name Blurt even if we move to the new chain entirely, if we do a parallel expansion we would have to see whether we can just call it BLURT on Cosmos or if we been to rename it CBLURT (which is less desirable).

On Binance it might be necessary according to their protocols to be called BBLURT, but not entirely sure.

Beach is the name of a Cosmos testnet, which has an open-ended purpose, it is intented as proof of concept for future launch chains and for validators to practice running nodes and governing a chain. It is completely unrealted to Blurt.

I hope this post has cleared things up, also note that the intention currently is only to gather information and sentiment, no firm plans are in place as yet.

Finalised plans will be announced on the @blurtofficial accounts, which will be used in the future to announce major economic changes and hard forks. So please follow that account.


Ricardo Ferreira
Blurt Co-Founder


Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE BLURT!
Sort Order:  

Burning the unclaimed exchange tokens is a brilliant idea. We can't wait on them forever for them to make up their damned mind.

Secondly, any idea that involves increasing the supply of BLURT spread across the various chains is not good for the health of the coin. It will eventually dilute existing holders investment over the long term. Keeping the supply the same across the chains is the best way to go.

Lastly, Blurt existing on multiple chains is the best way to go, rather than a total migration to a new chain.

I love the ideas going around for the advancement of Blurt. Solidly behind the team on this.

I took the time to read this post and I respect your decisions.

My point of view on the subject.

I think that is fine as well as this is just enough to refine details and love the platform, with all this you will see its slight growth, it could even take better reins than HIVE and STEEM if good decisions are made, literally taking it to COSMOS would be like launching of an airplane without a parachute, changing a whole code base to just add it to pancakeswap just because the Scorum token had a slight increase in its price is not something that seems logical to me, I respect your idea and I don't know about many things but I think that I should think a little more about it, maybe it would upset many users who today have fallen in love with as well as I fell in love with this platform, when reading part of that I am a little disappointed hehe I just hope that everything goes good and up great things are to come - BLURT ❤️

Sorry @megadrive, I ask an off topic question. BLURT on which blockchain is it built? Does it run on the STEEM blockchain?

Blurt currently runs on a modified clone of the Steem delegated proof of stake blockchain, a technology known as Graphene.

Thanks for the reply ... You seem like an important person in this project. Are you part of the development team? (if you don't have time don't answer, or if I'm impertinent don't answer)

I’m co-founder of Blurt :)

Wow !! Then I take the occasion to pay my compliments to you

Hi, @megadrive,

A mix between the second and third options is the most versatile one, with of course the possibility of deprecating the graphene version when needed after discussion. This means that everything is still on the table but we are just more cautious about it.

Leaning toward a new front-end regardless of the path taken is also a really good idea.

Thank you for the update,

Yes, I agree, that is my preference too. I like to have the best of both worlds and take a cautious approach.

A new front-end regardless of what path we take is a must.

What are your thoughts on burning the unclaimed exchanges' airdrop given 30 days notice?

Thank you so much for the detailed. Looking forward to other developments.

Thank you very much for your detailed answers. I have translated your post (slightly shortened) here into German, hope that is OK.

Spontaneously, I would tend towards option 3.

And, I have another question...

If we choose option #2 or #3 a new frontend is not needed

Why don't we need a new frontend with #2 or #3? The Cosmos version needs a frontend, doesn't it? And the current one is, as far as I know, not compatible with Cosmos.

  ·  6 months ago (edited)

Thanks for the translation, so 2 and 3 don't need a Cosmos flavoured frontend because the Cosmos chain would be much simpler, it would not have a rewards pool. The rewards pool would exist on native Graphene Blurt, condenser can be replaced on Graphene with something better eventually.

The idea with 2 and 3 is that other chains like ETH, BSC, Cosmos simply are bridged into to gain access to a wider investment market and access to liquidity pools, farming, NFT's etc. They are essentially expansion territories of Blurt, but the main content rewards inflation happens on the native Graphene version since it isn't being replaced by a Cosmos version.

Congratulations, your post has been curated by @dsc-r2cornell. You can use the tag #R2cornell. Also, find us on Discord

Manually curated by @blessed-girl

logo3 Discord.png

Felicitaciones, su publicación ha sido votada por @ dsc-r2cornell. Puedes usar el tag #R2cornell. También, nos puedes encontrar en Discord

I like the idea that Blurt remains Blurt on Graphene blockchain with eventual listing on Binance, etc…. I think Cosmos could be a Blurt related cousin on Cosmos and people on get a % Airdrop of new cosmos tokens …. Like the way SMS tokens are working on …. If I have 1 Million Blurtpower I earn maybe 100 CBC Cosmos Blurt Coins a day for the next 365 days on the new Cosmos Block chain blogging platform… no idea where the new CBC coins come from though … thin air ? Let’s get these 2 Blogging blockchains off the ground and monetized though…. Build community and monetize.

So we can basically expand Blurt into other chains, ETH, POLYGON, BSC, COSMOS etc, the new mint will increase supply for sure but I don't think it will affect the price much, alot of Blurt is dormant and unclaimed, we can even burn the airdrops not honoured by exchanges as proposed above.

Burning all unclaimed Blurt is a good idea … or offer an airdrop for all. Those with 10,000 + Blurtpower … lots of people will buy Blurt to get to 10,000 Blurtpower.

10,000 Blurt power gets 1,000 Blurt
20,000 Blurt power gets 2,000 Blurt
And so on ….

That’s a cool idea too, my thinking was burn on graphene and mint on bsc and cosmos this keeps supply down.

Thanks for explain, but can't know about cosmos. Is this useful for us

Expanding the territory of Blurt is always useful for us.

Ok, thank you sir

The proposal is to issue a hard fork that would burn these unused balances after a 30 day notice period being given to the affected exchanges via email to either list Blurt or have the funds burned.

This is the statement that caught my attention most.
I think a blanket move to share the two worlds would be of our best interest rather than a total shift to cosmos.
I trust the team and I am very much hopeful that whatever decisions that are considered final would be best.
Thank you for this detailed explanation @megadrive
I now have a better understanding of @jacobgadikian initial post.

Cosmos is a good choice because @jacobgadikian is familiar with the Cosmos-SDK codebase and will be able to navigate launching Blurt there.

This development is totally welcomed idea, I supportively proffer we go with what we know better as you have already highlighted.
The win is at the door already

Thanks for this explanatory article
Personally I'll prefer blurt runs on cosmos and also other blockchains if possible

I read with interest ... unfortunately I don't know what advice to give. Cosmos is a blockchain that I do not know and technically I am not prepared to give advice on these topics, but I read everything carefully

Thank you very much for this explanation of things @megadrive we are looking forward to help as we can in the future changes in the blurt ecosystem on graphene or cosmos (or both).

Thanks for the complete overview how the future could look like .