Removing Kylin as a Parachain & Revoking crowdloan lock!

Governance
1

Operation Kylin

Introduction !

By now many of you may have heard of me, but for those that haven’t, my name is Fetty.Dot, but I also commonly go by the alias “TheeWeb3Patriot”. I have been extremely active within OpenGov since launch, and my reputation has grown significantly within the last 3 months. This growth started with controversial referendums like 213, 295, 304, 401, and 431. Originally, my goal for creating such chaos from some of these proposals was to increase voter participation and wake up more whales to balance out the voting dynamic. However, we as a community have an opportunity to test out the potential of OpenGov. We could experiment with the removal of a parallel chain (Kylin) and test the first OpenGov treasury loan.

Brief History !

Kylin Parachain won its slot in August 2022 (https://finance.yahoo.com/news/kylin-network-wins-polkadots-25th-175937349.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAG3Pa5a7SlCyK-lmtvg245uLGT0h_w7exNvgCudW_IdG27Hj_eLOm1kEHaGXJ8hUMk1T6pgR4AUjlB4weXS1kZPvQmNqctM1bR1in1_-SFp1jT2FzKD-_7kgh8gBsw_L5z4vjZGLEEhCYsI1fMVVxyxtV7Mx8snYXzAYPs6j6HVg) and there were high hopes for its potential as a decentralized oracle service built on Polkadot. However, those high hopes soon faded away when Kylin had trouble launching its product. They never delivered, and Kylin is not even on Polkadot JS. The Parachain slot is not even listed as Kylin. They released a token but never launched. The token was soon delisted from all exchanges Kucoin and Gate.io ( ST: KuCoin Delisting of Some Projects| KuCoin. During this time, Kylin was attempting a token swap. Many Kylin holders had trouble with the swap. Soon after the swap push, Kylin completely ghosted their X profile. The last post was on July 19, 2023 (https://twitter.com/Kylin_Network/status/1681279227683909632/photo/1). Soon after, the Kylin telegram was ghosted (August 9, 2023) and set to text not allowed. Furthermore, Kylin founder Dylan Dewdney is active on X but does not mention Kylin at all. This appears to be a classic Rug pull. There is no product or communication. The token is useless.

Proposition!

What I propose is an unprecedented attempt at community governance. We should rally to remove Kylin as a Parachain and revoke the crowdloan lock. For this to be done, we must submit a root track. The root track requires a decision deposit of 100,000 $Dot. Not everyone has 100k $Dot in their back pocket. Which is why we should use this opportunity to test out the first OpenGov treasury loan. To achieve this, a loan will be requested in a big spend track where TheeWeb3Patriot will provide the decision deposit of 400 $Dot. The loan of 100k $Dot will go to a Multisig. The Multisig would be 4 threshold 7 signatories or 5 threshold 8 signatories of credible people and will not be associated with TheeWeb3Patriot. Ideally, these people will be known W3F associates, developers, OpenGov activists, or Polkadot validators like:

• Filippo

• Bill Laboon

• Shawn Tabrizi

• Jimmy Tudeski

• Jay Chrawnna

• Giotto

• Saxemberg

• Bld v7.59

• Ox Taylor

• Market Mobster

• Tiggah

Note! that this list is just an example of the type of credible people that I’m seeking to participate in the Multisig. They have no association with writing this proposal, and some probably don’t even know about this idea yet.

The Multisig signatories would then submit the decision deposit for the root track, and I will write up the proposal for removing Kylin as a Parachain slot and revoking the crowdloan lock.

Basically, there will be two referendums. Part 1 would be the OpenGov treasury loan for 100k $Dot for the decision deposit going to a Multisig of credible people. Part 2 will be the root track for removing Kylin as a Parachain and revoking the crowdloan lock where the Multisig would submit the decision deposit. Once the decision deposit is refunded from the root track, the Multisig will return the 100,000 $Dot to the treasury. There you have it, folks, our first OpenGov Treasury loan and our first Parachain removal.

Why is this important!

It is important that we do this as a community because it is a form of self-governance. It sets the tone going forward that we will not tolerate bad actors within the ecosystem. Although Polkadot is shifting from the lease model system, there will still be Parallel chains that have their lease, I believe. Also, when dealing with ambitious protocol upgrades, we may not get 2.0 till the end of the year or even next year on Polkadot. Even when the Parachain lease systems are removed, we as a community might face situations where Blockspace buyers rug pull. In that event, should they still hold that Blockspace? Kylin gives us an opportunity to test how OpenGov can be utilized and set consequences (You scam us, we kick you out and free up that space).

This proposal will also test a new feature OpenGov treasury loan (T Loans). I think this concept has potential as we progress towards OpenGov V3. The idea of treasury loans can play a crucial role in governance on Polkadot in the future. The loans can even be potentially burnt or even tied to an interest-producing system for the treasury/treasuries. This will also be the first crowdloan revoke from a rug pull which I think is cool to experiment with. Lastly, it frees up the 150,000 $Dot from the 1000 plus contributors that got duped by Kylin.

Conclusion!

As of now, I am planning to take this to vote once the Multisig members have been established. I am also waiting for some $Dot to be unbonded from staking in 7 days. Today I purchased an additional 53 $Dot and will buy about 100 more over the course of this week. I think as a community this is a beneficial experiment and most importantly it tests the capabilities of self-governance. Join me patriots in holding Kylin accountable. Long Live DotSama!

11 Likes
2

I absolutely support this initiative. Let’s clean and remove irrelevant parachains from Polkadot

As a 1KV validator - Will be happy to support wherever it’s needed (also with the 400 DOT if I understand correctly)

2 Likes
3

I will always support any initiative against fraud

1 Like
4

Fully in support.

1 Like
5

Borrowing from the treasury for Decision Deposits removes the risk. When you remove the risk it creates moral hazard. When the referendum gets killed, which can happen, will the signatories to the multisig be held liable for the return of the loan?

You should make your case against the Kylin chain in a referendum and see if there is a token holder willing to step up, post the decision deposit, and assume the slashing risk. Forcible removal of a parachain is a big deal. There needs to be due diligence. What is the benefit? To my mind it makes more sense to just let the slot expire naturally in a few months.

6 Likes
6

Kinda agree. Yet, curious to see if this could evolve into some sorta decentralized (legal) action against bad apples in general. Would be awesome to have a process in place that would deincentivize malicious actors from entering the ecosystem. “You mess up or act dishonestly and there will be consequences”.

Perhaps worth checking if Kleros or some other existing Web3 arbitration platform would like to collaborate. I’m sure there are also a bunch of lawyers in the community who might want to set something up.

A good read:

Initial Litigation Offering from Avalanche was an interesting innovation too:
https://x.com/el33th4xor/status/1453086411482013698?s=20

7

I agree with this. I don’t think there’s anything substantive to gain from forcibly removing Kylin from the network, but doing so would come with some risks, so the calculus just doesn’t work out for me.

3 Likes
8

Hey everyone,

We at Composable acquired Kylin’s parachain slot from their team, which is set to expire in June. We kindly ask you to refrain from proceeding with this initiative to revoke their parachain slot as it is actively being utilised for the Composable Parachain - para id 2019.

2 Likes
9

Hey Jafar,

Is there any links leading to explanation of that acquisition?

1 Like
10

The crowdloan expires and funds returned… then new auction required so doesn’t patience cure this?

11

Hey Fetty

Thanks for tossing my name into the ring with some of the folks I admire in this space. It’s a pretty cool surprise to be mentioned among such dedicated Polkadot ecosystem agents.

Diving straight into the heart of this proposal, I gotta say it’s bold and sparks a lot of food for thought. The idea of shaking things up to eliminate a parachain that hasn’t lived up to expectations is something out of the governance playbook we’re all still writing. And the bit about experimenting with an OpenGov treasury loan? That’s some next-level thinking right there.

But, and there’s always a but, isn’t there? I’m leaning more towards the “let’s wait and see” camp. Pulling the plug on Kylin and diving into the deep end with a treasury loan feels like we’re opening Pandora’s Box.

The way I see it, the Polkadot ecosystem has its rhythms, and sometimes, the best action is no action—at least for now. Letting Kylin’s lease run its course seems like the path of least resistance and, honestly, the least risky. It’s like letting nature take its course instead of trying to control the weather.

Don’t get me wrong; I’m all for pushing boundaries and exploring what’s possible with our governance model. But there’s a time and place for everything. The benefits of going down this road aren’t crystal clear.

I’m keen to keep discussing this and other ideas that help us grow stronger and more cohesive as a community. After all, these discussions keep the DotSama spirit alive and kicking.

Thanks again for the nod,

Cheers, Jimmy

1 Like
12

Thank you I think it could be a very community driven test, I was in a way threaten or at least two prominent people suggested I was going to get Ref killed so it kind of made me hesitant. However, it was suggested by a trusted Polkadot community member that this likely wouldn’t be Ref killed since it isn’t malicious and ref kills are supposed to be used for malicious refs.

If you would like to explore being part of the multisig add me on X?

13

If you’re interested in being part of the multisig I will talk to you on X.

14

Do you have something that can confirm that or do I have to reach out to Composable?

15

Not really if Kylin is a proven rug why wouldn’t we want the crowd loan unlocked immediately?

The 1000 contributors deserve to have sovereignty over their dot. By the time the crowd loan comes Dot could have touched 16 dollars then crashed down to 6 dollars or could have gone from current price to 2 dollars. It’s not really fair that they pay the burden.

FYI I hold no Kylin and never participate in any crowd loan.

16

It is important that we do this as a community because it is a form of self-governance. It sets the tone going forward that we will not tolerate bad actors within the ecosystem. Although Polkadot is shifting from the lease model system, there will still be Parallel chains that have their lease, I believe. Also, when dealing with ambitious protocol upgrades, we may not get 2.0 till the end of the year or even next year on Polkadot. Even when the Parachain lease systems are removed, we as a community might face situations where Blockspace buyers rug pull. In that event, should they still hold that Blockspace? Kylin gives us an opportunity to test how OpenGov can be utilized and set consequences (You scam us, we kick you out and free up that space).

This proposal will also test a new feature OpenGov treasury loan (T Loans). I think this concept has potential as we progress towards OpenGov V3. The idea of treasury loans can play a crucial role in governance on Polkadot in the future. The loans can even be potentially burnt or even tied to an interest-producing system for the treasury/treasuries. This will also be the first crowdloan revoke from a rug pull which I think is cool to experiment with. Lastly, it frees up the 150,000 $Dot from the 1000 plus contributors that got duped by Kylin.

17

I will check it out

18

Thats the goal of this

19

The ref won’t get killed because it’s not malicious and ref kills are for malicious refs… if one was put to vote a lot of people should be inclined to vote against it because that’s not what ref kills are used for. There’s a difference between a proposal you disagree with and a malicious proposal.

Realistically the root wouldn’t get ref killed and probably would get little support to ref kill it because it’s not malicious.

What’s more likely is a ref kill at the big tipper where I submit the 400 dot DD and even that might not get ref killed cause its once again not malicious.

In terms of the benefits, I go over that in the why it’s important I suggest you read it again.

20

Yes, sure.

1 Like