Thank you for your post. I think you misunderstand the reason behind the changes, what is meant by “fair launch” in the context of Creator Coin listings and precisely what information is made available to “insiders.” I want to allay your concerns about any possible information asymmetry here as it relates to the council, particularly around large creators.
I’m writing to you here as a community member that was voted in to the council having demonstrated my understanding of the protocol and my commitment to supporting creator communities and the larger Rally community.
First, what was the state of information transparency before the creator council? Each creator that passed business development was brought to a snapshot approval vote by RLY holders. The timing of their launch was known by essential Rally team launching the coin, and the Creator who would sometimes opt to announce to their community or more broadly. There were two tremendous downsides to this approach: 1. Creators could not control the announcement of their coin launch. 2. It made for a slower, unscalable onboarding process that necessitated daily active participation of RLY holders.
Now, presently. The creator council was voted in by the community of RLY holders, effectively delegating their votes in order to streamline the process of onboarding new creators to the network. Additionally, Creators could now be empowered to control their own coin economy from the outset, including the announcement of their new coin, and as some have chosen to do - the timing of the launch. And finally, 2 of the members of the council are employed by Rally, leaving 3 of us that are purely community members.
What information does the Creator council have? We see the applications, and we discuss and vote on candidates. We are not provided any information on launch timing. What this means, is we have no advantage to participate early in launches.
What is “fair launch.” Your quote from Kevin refers to listing creator coins in a fashion that provides all participants in a certain time frame equal opportunity to participate and to participate at the same price. This is actively in development, and the team has not shared the timeline for launch yet.
Your hypothetical demonstrates the risk of some information asymmetry that is present in the current system that was chosen by the community as trade-off to allow the platform to scale and provide the creators with control. It also provides greater protection to the very VIPs that would not participate in our protocol if we could not provide guarantees of secrecy to preserve their “business advantage” as a Creator. I also expect individuals at that level would require certain NDAs to ensure they could control every aspect of their participation. However, even if they did not, you must accept that some level of secrecy is necessary to conduct business in general.
Did Yearn announce they were in talks with Sushi, Cream, Pickle or Cover the day they received an email or chat to being discussing? Of course not. The announcement reached the community equally, probably through a tweet! Were there a few folks on the “inside” that knew about the talks or the agreements? Of course, they had to in order to execute on it. Similarly, Rally is taking reasonable precautions to protect the council from any information asymmetry that could put them or the protocol at risk. This is why we have the essential information to perform our duty in voting, but not the information around launches. I certainly don’t want the SEC knocking at my door - that is a strong incentive not to spread the word.
I hope you can now see how this very limited “secrecy” gives Rally itself a huge business advantage, and makes it far more attractive to prospective creators - our core business!
The community did weigh this in the past and made a sensible choice. Creators have been pleased to control the messaging, and to my knowledge the Council has continued to act in the best interests of the protocol.
Look, some level of trust is essential even in these “trustless” communities. Synthetix has a council, Balancer has a new council and they are all working to improve and run their respective protocols in different capacities. And while Rally is being built and developing, the goal will be to get to a point where creators can self-serve and the council is no longer needed.
I hope this is a satisfactory response. And welcome you to DM me on discord if you’d like to discuss further. The community call is also a great forum to bring up questions and concerns.