AIP-378: ApeChain Bid // ApeChain Developed with Arbitrum Technology with Growth Led by Horizen Labs

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

We have sent a list of follow up questions to the author.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

1 Like

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@ninarong has responded to our questions and has provided consent to share them in this forum for the community.

  1. Would your expectation be to retain complete ownership of content produced from this proposal? Please elaborate.
  • Will you please clarify this question? Our expectation is for ApeCoin DAO to ultimately own this initiative. This is why we have advocated for ApeCoin DAO to serve as the primary governing body for ApeChain; our vision is for ApeChain to serve as a natural extension of the ApeCoin DAO body. That said, not sure that we fully understand your question so more detail would be appreciated.
  1. Once developed and deployed, who would own and have oversight of the officially sanctioned Adaptive OFT contract?
  • The contract could be owned, at the community‚Äôs discretion (and w/ legal counsel‚Äôs advice) by Horizen Labs or by the DAO itself. It could also be renounced as the original $APE contract was.
  • Should the contract not be renounced, regardless of ownerships, Horizen Labs can maintain/upgrade the contract as needed.
  1. Once developed and deployed, who would own the Arbitrum Orbit LayerZero ApeChain contract?
  • See answers above to Question #2.
  1. Please provide proof of consent from the Special Council and their willingness to facilitate the collection of community input on various key decisions of this proposal, or we can update the language to include the choice for members of the Special Council to ‚Äúopt-in‚ÄĚ to these responsibilities.
  • We did not get explicit consent from the Special Council; please update the proposal to allow Special Council members to ‚Äúopt-in‚ÄĚ to these responsibilities.
  1. In response to question one of the previous round, you stated ‚ÄúOur collective group will then present a proposal to ApeCoin DAO for ApeChain‚Äôs configuration based on this feedback, which the DAO will vote on.‚ÄĚ When is it expected that these DAO-wide votes would take place?
  • Collecting input from the community on the finer details of the chain‚Äôs configuration, and putting those details to vote, will be a top priority following our proposal‚Äôs approval. In the first week, we plan to share a full recommendation and outline the various decisions that will fall to the DAO. We will outline some of the potential considerations and related tradeoffs, and organize community calls for interested community members to voice their opinions. We would expect these votes to be completed 3-4 weeks after our proposal‚Äôs approval.
  1. In response to question eight of the previous round and sections of your proposal which outlines a ‚Äúcustom gas token‚ÄĚ, please elaborate on the expectations for development and deployment of this ‚Äúcustom gas token‚ÄĚ. Please elaborate on any implications for the ApeCoin DAO community.
  • There seems to be some confusion about our previous response; a ‚Äúcustom gas token‚ÄĚ refers to a token other than Ethereum for the use of gas on an orbit chain. In this case, it would be $APE. The audit report is for orbit chains in general that leverage the AnyTrust design and use an ERC-20 for gas.
  1. Is the team requesting that the ApeChain which would be produced as a result of this proposal would be the exclusive ApeChain of the ApeCoin ecosystem?
  • Yes. Obviously the community has a right to deploy multiple networks, but our recommendation would be to deploy a single ApeChain. Deploying multiple ApeChains would likely increase complexity for developers and confuse users, so we advise limiting focus to one chain.
  1. Would the DAC receive transaction payments directly from the ApeChain contract or from the APE Foundation?
  • Both options are possible and we are happy to accommodate whichever is preferred by the Ape Foundation.
  1. Please elaborate on your expectations for implementing the OFTV2 token standard.
  • This implementation would be the OFTV1 token standard as it sits on top of pre-existing ERC20.
  • The OFT contract would provide a ‚Äúlock‚ÄĚ on Ethereum upon first bridge, and then a mint on the second chain. Any further transfers would be a burn and mint until the token ended up back on Ethereum at which point it would be unlocked.
  • Implementation will come with a number of benefits including:
    • Work towards integrating $APE into popular cross-chain swaps and bridges built on top of LayerZero such as Stargate and Interport.
    • The creation of a dedicated ApeBridge if desired for the direct transfer of $APE from Ethereum to ApeChain (note that the DAO can share in the revenue should fees be included on top of these transfers).
  1. Would this proposal impact the current ApeCoin DAO AIP process?
  • Not to our knowledge but if the Ape Foundation or Special Council has concerns we are happy to talk through them. Our objective is to leverage ApeCoin DAO‚Äôs existing governance structure as the foundation for ApeChain‚Äôs governance.
  1. Could the community vote on ApeCoin proposals using their new LayerZero ApeChain OFTs, or must they lock and migrate back to ERC-20 to engage with ApeCoin DAO governance?
  • The OFT standard would allow for cross-chain voting. In other words, users could engage in ApeCoin governance regardless of where their $APE is held. Horizen Labs and LayerZero will assist in the design and implementation (note LayerZero has done similar work with high-profile projects such as Balancer).
  • The community could decide to allow voting across either an outlined set of chains or open it up to $APE held on any chain (we suggest the latter as it will encourage the propagation and use of $APE across multiple ecosystems).
  1. Would a new Snapshot voting strategy be required for the existing ApeCoin DAO Snapshot space to allow for the use of OFTs?
  • Potentially. Horizen Labs and LayerZero would work with the community to implement any necessary or desired changes. We do not anticipate a major lift.
  1. The proposal mentions that the Arbitrum Foundation would be happy to provide grant funding for various stated costs. Assuming that Arbitrum technology is adopted as a result of this proposal, what would be the process for the ApeCoin community to access these grants?
  • The community (i.e. The ApeCoin DAO) will not directly ‚Äúaccess‚ÄĚ these funds. Rather these will be distributed to the Security Council, RaaS and Block Explorer as per the proposal. If the ApeCoin DAO & Ape Foundation have a preferred process, please let us know.
  1. Do you provide consent to apply updates to the relevant areas of your proposal based on your responses to the questions above?
  • Yes, but please share these updates before they are pushed through.
  1. Do you provide consent to share these questions with the community in this forum?
  • Yes.

A DAR package is being worked on and upon completion, this AIP will move into Administrative Review. Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

We have sent a list of follow-up questions to the author.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

Edits have been made to this Topic, by the author or at the author’s request.

You can click the Pencil icon at the top of the post to see these edits.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

This AIP is now under Administrative Review.

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

@ninarong has responded to our questions and has provided consent to share them in this forum for the community.

1. Please provide proof of funds to sustain the maintenance of ApeChain including the Security Council, RaaS provider, and Block Explorer for the next 3 years, or alternatively, a disclaimer stating the absence of proof of funds.

  • Please see here for proof of funds and let us know if additional information is required.

2. Following up on question 5 from the first round, can you please provide proof of consent from the members of the DAC (Magic Eden, Darewise Entertainment, LayerZero Labs, and Offchain Labs) and their willingness to cooperate in the implementation of this proposal.

  • Proof of consent has been provided by: Robert Viglione, Co-Founder and CEO of Horizen Labs; Bryan Pellegrino, CEO of LayerZero Labs; Benjamin Charbit, CEO of Darewise Entertainment; Chris Akhavan, Chief Gaming Officer of Magic Eden; and Allan Warner, CSO of Offchain Labs, as indicated below.

3. Your team has recommended establishing an ApeChain Security Council.

Please clarify an initial set of responsibilities, expectations, and requirements for members in this role including, but not limited to: relevant expertise/key skills, expectations around time commitments, any grant or compensation structure for the Council members, and reporting responsibilities.

  • Relevant Expertise/Key Skills: The role of the Security Council is fundamentally to act as a line of defense in the event of a time-sensitive vulnerability that potentially puts users funds at risk. Its purpose is to have a distributed set of individuals that understand the technology and can make technical decisions fairly quickly. This is not a business development, growth, or community role. As such, it is recommended for members of the Security Council to have a strong technical background.
  • Expectations around time commitments: This is not expected to be a time consuming role. Arbitrum‚Äôs Security Council to date has not had to take action. However, they stand by at the ready as an additional line of defense, ready to respond to any unforeseen circumstances. Security Council members are expected to have PagerDuty installed on their mobile device in order to respond to any incident.
  • Compensation Structure: The specific compensation structure remains TBD. Ultimately ApeCoin DAO will have control over the specific rate and can vote to raise or lower the salary as it sees fit.
  • Please see here for a full overview of Arbitrum‚Äôs approach to the Security Council for its public chains, which would serve as the foundation of the structure for ApeChain‚Äôs Security Council.

4. Do you provide consent to share these questions with the community in this forum?

  • Yes

Follow this Topic as further updates will be posted here in the comments.

Kind Regards,

-@Facilitators

This proposal is live for vote on Snapshot. The voting period closes 13 days from now at 9PM EST, pending the outcome of ApeChain: Build an ApeChain - Vote For or Against.

The AIP implementation is administered by the Ape Foundation. Implementation may be immaterially or materially altered to optimize for security, usability, to protect APE holders, and otherwise to effect the intent of the AIP. Any material deviations from an AIP, as initially approved, will be disclosed to the APE holder community.

1 Like

Hi ApeCoin DAO Community,

The voting period has closed for this proposal and it has been accepted with a 50.35% pass rate. The proposal will be passed on for implementation.

Follow this proposal under the AIP Transparency and Execution Category. A new post has been created here, Implementation Update | AIP-378: ApeChain Bid // ApeChain Developed with Arbitrum Technology with Growth Led by Horizen Labs, and further updates will be posted.

Thanks,

-@Facilitators

2 Likes