HOGE.NATION

Join the community. Join the movement.

REGISTER

V2 Conversation

I recently promised I would write an article discussing the possibility of a HOGE V2.

Here it is, folks.

The conversation will happen all over the place... Twitter, Reddit, YouTube, Telegram. But I hope this will be the official/central hub where the ideas come together. I very much look forward to your feedback.

 

Emp

Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
19
I read your article in detail, and I disagree with many things made. The first is that our 2% tax is problematic. That isn't the problem; that's a feature by design. We have deflationary tokenomics. Giving certain people the power to be whitelisted from that tax isn't "decentralized." You say our gas cost goes up the more people are excluded but maybe that means we shouldn't be doing that. Exchanges can donate any reflections to our dev/community wallet, keep them, or send them to charities.

Also:
PROBLEM 6: We lack sufficient dev tokens to enter into partnership agreements (e.g., with venture capitalists) or pay for development. Most of the old dev team has moved on to other projects due to the lack of payment and/or incentives (they were paying to work for Hoge).

Why v2 solves this: With a v2 contract we have a one-time opportunity to create a dev fund. This can be used to incentivize development work and recruit devs that will build Hoge going forward.

This I disagree with the most. There has never been a single thing that our community has not been able to fundraise to achieve. The devs asked the community for $500,000, something insane, and our community pulled together to make it happen based on promises which were never met. Trying to recreate hoge with a "dev tax" is short-term thinking. I assure you if the promises offered was kept, the community would be stronger than ever and continue funding any initiative. The fact we are bleeding in value is a sign people were upset at goals not being met & bitcoin selling off.


Also,

"
when the liquidity unlocks a few months from now, we’re at risk of losing our ability to trade on Uniswap.

Liquidity, the lifeblood of a token, will bleed out if we simply HODL. First we’ll bleed out slow, then quick."

This is a bold assumption for two reasons. 1) Liquidity unlocking doesn't mean it is removed. 2) If you assume it is being removed, you have to ask yourself why would someone want to remove liquidity? Perhaps they see Hoge as not valuable and are trying to rug pull us? Not sure, but you can't assume.

I added liquidity to the pool myself, and if people were to sell 300,000,000,000 hoge tomorrow, there would still be liquidity in the pool to trade. In fact, we would see people buying in swarms to take advantage of the price drop. Liquidity is a sign of trust in the coin, if people see the coin as valuable they won't try to drain all the ETH in the pool and have a demand for Hoge.

I get paid for my liquidity provided and so does everyone else that adds. Not sure why you assume we will dry out unless you know in advance that big liquidity holders are going to take theirs out and dump their holdings of hoge.

"If we take no action, then a few months from now HOGE is going to die." If hoge dies, it's because the community gave up on the initial vision and was too scattered by all the misdirection and failed initiatives. If we can't get V1 right, what makes you think another thing splitting us apart would work. It's grasping at straws here. The whole post argues the flaws of a tax, and then says "let's raise our tax to 5%"

At this point, we need to realign our roadmap to start achieving promises and we will see the community start growing and our liquidity will grow with it.
 

mumu

DEV
Joined
Mar 16, 2021
Messages
66
V2 is a good idea if for no other reason than because it puts the contract back in the hands and control of the community. Right now the contract is renounced and has many limitations that the community is running up against. @Emp I think you're missing the potential here. @Hogefather has some ideas and others have ideas, perhaps similar or different, but in the end the community would decide which direction to go with specific proposals.

If HOGE is to reach a mainstream crypto audience, the contract will eventually be reworked... perhaps multiple times. Perhaps now is a good time to deploy a new one for the reasons mentioned by Jesse. HOGE is not defined by its specific smart contract but rather the community of holders. If you move LP to a new contract, and airdrop or make claimable the same quantity of tokens on the new contract, you've merely migrated to new software, something that we're all very well accustomed to. I don't see many people still running first edition iphones and considering how new blockchain is as a technology from an adoption standpoint, and how new smart contracts are in the grand scheme of things, it would be *foolish* to dig our heels in and say "no, never" will we even update our contract. Think long term here.

As for the specifics, I would chime in the following:

- I believe that HOGE should have a COMMUNITY OWNED LP and not just a bunch of holders who step up to own the LP as we have now but rather an LP that is not owned by any one wallet and cannot be pulled. Flat wallet distribution is meaningless with low LP. For this reason I would propose a 3-month LP building phase during which the entire tax (I would say 3%) goes to LP, and after 3 months we return to the original 1/1 tokenomics. This is only possible with a new SC.

- I'm in favor of using a war chest strategically, selectively but it's not as important as some other topics to me. My ideal would be to have a 50b wallet that earns (lives off) redistribution and serves as an automatic charity of sorts, without costing anybody tokens that they didn't already burn in the past. This would give the project funding to hire devs or pay for marketing campaigns. One whale might be willing to donate but many whales aren't liquid and can't donate stablecoin. Using tokens to bring in a VC or investor should be done with careful consideration and community approval.

- I'm 100% for whitelist capability to be used for exchanges, market makers, and W2W transfers. I gave up 2% to transfer to a wallet and would love to be able to send some HOGE to friends and family without paying 2%. This just makes sense.

- Another thing that I would welcome is the ability to give back all of the tokens that have been accidentally sent to the smart contract. I think it's hundreds of millions of HOGE sitting in there.

Let's remember what HOGE represented to us... to me, it was never about being married to a forked smart contract that was used by a dev who is long gone.

Taking back our contract is 100% bullish IMO. Lots of options both at time of upgrade and in the future.
 
Joined
Apr 7, 2021
Messages
13
Thanks for writing this! I think it's worth getting a wide range of ideas about a v2 migration and hopefully having the good ones rise to the top.

Some thoughts: first off I don't think not migrating to v2 will cause the inevitable death of HOGE, the language there is a little bit over the top.

LOVE the idea of preserving tokenomics across blockchains.

I don't like the idea of a 5% tax (way too high in my opinion) even if it deflates over time. I would be weary of going over the 2% tax we currently have.

I do like the idea of getting rid of tax on P2P/wallet-to-wallet transfers.

I don't like the idea of getting rid of the burn over time. The deflationary aspect of HOGE drew so many of us to this project - I think getting rid of it at any time in the future would be a very tough pill for many of us to swallow - I know it would be for me.

The talk of tax in the article is a bit muddled - you mention burn and a liquidity tax specifically, but there is implication for a dev tax as well. For example, in the HOGEMAN quote it looks to me like he is talking about having a 'dev' or 'project' tax that trends to 0 after a year (or possibly a liquidity tax as well if that could be considered 'reinvestment into the project' here).

Not mentioned is the auto-redistribution tax feature we currently have, which I also think a bunch of people are in love with (DeFi made easy). I think it would be wise to keep this in some form

I do like the idea of a temporary, partial tax to liquidity pool that goes down as a pool limit is reached. What this limit is set at is an important consideration for sure - I'm not sure that a flat 5 million is a good idea or not but I don't have any good answers or other ideas.

So I guess if I had to sum up a system I could get behind after reading the article:

2% overall tax on DEX transactions remains into perpetuity
- to start, some of this tax goes to LP, dev wallet, burn, and private holder wallets
- over time, LP tax trends to 0 and dev tax trends to 0

0% tax on wallet-to-wallet transfers

Which blockchain or layer we might migrate our core HOGE to is another huge question! I know matic was mentioned, but there are other options. Would be great to figure out a way to evaluate these options as objectively as possible.

Thanks again Jessie and I really look forward to seeing what ideas we come up with as a community!
 

Emp

Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
19
V2 is a good idea if for no other reason than because it puts the contract back in the hands and control of the community. Right now the contract is renounced and has many limitations that the community is running up against. @Emp I think you're missing the potential here. @Hogefather has some ideas and others have ideas, perhaps similar or different, but in the end the community would decide which direction to go with specific proposals.

If HOGE is to reach a mainstream crypto audience, the contract will eventually be reworked... perhaps multiple times. Perhaps now is a good time to deploy a new one for the reasons mentioned by Jesse. HOGE is not defined by its specific smart contract but rather the community of holders. If you move LP to a new contract, and airdrop or make claimable the same quantity of tokens on the new contract, you've merely migrated to new software, something that we're all very well accustomed to. I don't see many people still running first edition iphones and considering how new blockchain is as a technology from an adoption standpoint, and how new smart contracts are in the grand scheme of things, it would be *foolish* to dig our heels in and say "no, never" will we even update our contract. Think long term here.

As for the specifics, I would chime in the following:

- I believe that HOGE should have a COMMUNITY OWNED LP and not just a bunch of holders who step up to own the LP as we have now but rather an LP that is not owned by any one wallet and cannot be pulled. Flat wallet distribution is meaningless with low LP. For this reason I would propose a 3-month LP building phase during which the entire tax (I would say 3%) goes to LP, and after 3 months we return to the original 1/1 tokenomics. This is only possible with a new SC.

- I'm in favor of using a war chest strategically, selectively but it's not as important as some other topics to me. My ideal would be to have a 50b wallet that earns (lives off) redistribution and serves as an automatic charity of sorts, without costing anybody tokens that they didn't already burn in the past. This would give the project funding to hire devs or pay for marketing campaigns. One whale might be willing to donate but many whales aren't liquid and can't donate stablecoin. Using tokens to bring in a VC or investor should be done with careful consideration and community approval.

- I'm 100% for whitelist capability to be used for exchanges, market makers, and W2W transfers. I gave up 2% to transfer to a wallet and would love to be able to send some HOGE to friends and family without paying 2%. This just makes sense.

- Another thing that I would welcome is the ability to give back all of the tokens that have been accidentally sent to the smart contract. I think it's hundreds of millions of HOGE sitting in there.

Let's remember what HOGE represented to us... to me, it was never about being married to a forked smart contract that was used by a dev who is long gone.

Taking back our contract is 100% bullish IMO. Lots of options both at time of upgrade and in the future.
"I believe that HOGE should have a COMMUNITY OWNED LP and not just a bunch of holders who step up to own the LP"



Let's say we have 200 ETH in the pool and Hoge value equivalent of 200eth.


Now say we have "rug pullmaster 1000" who owns 15 billion Hoge he bought for $115.



Or he could sell 10ETH, leaving 190 left in the pool. Now our price drops. In order to get it back to original price we need 10 eth worth of purchasing. So over next week's it happens. He then immediately dumps another 10eth. This repeats for a couple weeks. People realize one guy is greedy and rinsing up all our community LP. They start to sell their Hoge too.



Before long, our community LP has no eth, and our community itself has had all our personal eth drained from buying hoge just for the greedy rug pullmaster to drain it from our pool.



This is what happens when you have inefficient markets. Liquidity providers believe in the project and the coin so they provide and collect a fee.



If people saw rugmaster trying that, they would yank liquidity. Rug pull master would get tired and dump all his holdings. Our price would have a big drop. Called a fire sale. People would realize the dump is over and quickly buy the dip to take advantage of the low price.



Then we would long-term grow.



Right now we have a lot of early whales (not all) who give nothing to the community but dump. The only way is to wait them out, list on central exchanges or keep growing as a community to where our demand will outpace all the supply from dumping. They want to take their quick profit and leave, which is their choice but we shouldn't encourage their behavor.
 
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
19
V2 is a good idea if for no other reason than because it puts the contract back in the hands and control of the community. Right now the contract is renounced and has many limitations that the community is running up against. @Emp I think you're missing the potential here. @Hogefather has some ideas and others have ideas, perhaps similar or different, but in the end the community would decide which direction to go with specific proposals.

If HOGE is to reach a mainstream crypto audience, the contract will eventually be reworked... perhaps multiple times. Perhaps now is a good time to deploy a new one for the reasons mentioned by Jesse. HOGE is not defined by its specific smart contract but rather the community of holders. If you move LP to a new contract, and airdrop or make claimable the same quantity of tokens on the new contract, you've merely migrated to new software, something that we're all very well accustomed to. I don't see many people still running first edition iphones and considering how new blockchain is as a technology from an adoption standpoint, and how new smart contracts are in the grand scheme of things, it would be *foolish* to dig our heels in and say "no, never" will we even update our contract. Think long term here.

As for the specifics, I would chime in the following:

- I believe that HOGE should have a COMMUNITY OWNED LP and not just a bunch of holders who step up to own the LP as we have now but rather an LP that is not owned by any one wallet and cannot be pulled. Flat wallet distribution is meaningless with low LP. For this reason I would propose a 3-month LP building phase during which the entire tax (I would say 3%) goes to LP, and after 3 months we return to the original 1/1 tokenomics. This is only possible with a new SC.

- I'm in favor of using a war chest strategically, selectively but it's not as important as some other topics to me. My ideal would be to have a 50b wallet that earns (lives off) redistribution and serves as an automatic charity of sorts, without costing anybody tokens that they didn't already burn in the past. This would give the project funding to hire devs or pay for marketing campaigns. One whale might be willing to donate but many whales aren't liquid and can't donate stablecoin. Using tokens to bring in a VC or investor should be done with careful consideration and community approval.

- I'm 100% for whitelist capability to be used for exchanges, market makers, and W2W transfers. I gave up 2% to transfer to a wallet and would love to be able to send some HOGE to friends and family without paying 2%. This just makes sense.

- Another thing that I would welcome is the ability to give back all of the tokens that have been accidentally sent to the smart contract. I think it's hundreds of millions of HOGE sitting in there.

Let's remember what HOGE represented to us... to me, it was never about being married to a forked smart contract that was used by a dev who is long gone.

Taking back our contract is 100% bullish IMO. Lots of options both at time of upgrade and in the future.
Mumu and Emp both have great points.

A few things I want to comment on:

1. The migration:
— we can’t assume that everyone know how to migrate their coins if we require the community to do so. We need to make this seamless with no ask from Holders.

2. Tax and Dev Tokens
- I am actually 100% in favor of this with one exception. We need to let the community decide or have some input on how it gets allocated. We’ve done an incredible job raising funds, but it’s become a burden and tiresome to make it happen. To have funds set aside when exchanges approach us and make payments instantly without having to keep asking the community for funds would be huge. It’s also being able to strike while the iron is hot before the lead grows old. Cash is king and asking our community to raise funds every time we need something isn’t sustainable.

3. Community Tax
I’m in favor of also having an additional community tax and we can do something that rewards holders. This doesn’t have to be an airdrop or NFTs, but could also be exclusive HOGE events, HOGE meetups and other things that build a bridge between our community in crypto and real life. I’ve been saying this for awhile, but our community is our #1 utility.

The stronger our community is -> the greater impact our projects and development work will have. If we implement a tax for devs tokens we should implement the same tax amount to support the community.

Thank you hogefather for sparking this discussion and want to ensure we keep it positive and productive.
 

Emp

Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
19
Mumu and Emp both have great points.

A few things I want to comment on:

1. The migration:
— we can’t assume that everyone know how to migrate their coins if we require the community to do so. We need to make this seamless with no ask from Holders.

2. Tax and Dev Tokens
- I am actually 100% in favor of this with one exception. We need to let the community decide or have some input on how it gets allocated. We’ve done an incredible job raising funds, but it’s become a burden and tiresome to make it happen. To have funds set aside when exchanges approach us and make payments instantly without having to keep asking the community for funds would be huge. It’s also being able to strike while the iron is hot before the lead grows old. Cash is king and asking our community to raise funds every time we need something isn’t sustainable.

3. Community Tax
I’m in favor of also having an additional community tax and we can do something that rewards holders. This doesn’t have to be an airdrop or NFTs, but could also be exclusive HOGE events, HOGE meetups and other things that build a bridge between our community in crypto and real life. I’ve been saying this for awhile, but our community is our #1 utility.

The stronger our community is -> the greater impact our projects and development work will have. If we implement a tax for devs tokens we should implement the same tax amount to support the community.

Thank you hogefather for sparking this discussion and want to ensure we keep it positive and productive.

I'll speak for a silent majority but if I wanted a community / dev tax I'd have bought safemoon or any other floki or any other pump n dump coin that won't last. Bitcoin is around not because they tax their community, but because the developers believe in their vision and work knowing their own personal holdings will grow in value. If you have to pay someone to be there, the second that dries up, they are gone, the ads expire, and you are left with nothing.

It goes entirely against the premise of "we are decentralized and run by community" but oh yeah, every transfer, money goes towards our centralized small elite group to control our project.

Our community is tired of fundraising not because we are asked too much, it's because the promises haven't come to fruition. (not to push blame on anyone, but it's true). If/when we list on top 5, and our price goes up, I along with many others would have no issue donating for something we believe in feeling confident our promises would be reached.


Personally, I think the DAO (which has been pitched around but not happened) would solve this. Imagine as a community we could fundraise 10 billion hoge for developers, but there is a contract that says each week only 1% can be removed unless the price is above "x price" or had some sort of incentive to keep from saying, "well I know everyone donated a total of $100,000 but we dropped 50% so we are going to sell it all and use the $50k on this tiny listing" That is not prudent. We need a war chest, just like you said, we need to have the money ready to go for a listing and what better way than having a pot that we know won't just be dumped. It will be held and slowly spent as milestones like 1c, 10c, etc. are met.
 
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
19
I'll speak for a silent majority but if I wanted a community / dev tax I'd have bought safemoon or any other floki or any other pump n dump coin that won't last. Bitcoin is around not because they tax their community, but because the developers believe in their vision and work knowing their own personal holdings will grow in value. If you have to pay someone to be there, the second that dries up, they are gone, the ads expire, and you are left with nothing.

It goes entirely against the premise of "we are decentralized and run by community" but oh yeah, every transfer, money goes towards our centralized small elite group to control our project.

Our community is tired of fundraising not because we are asked too much, it's because the promises haven't come to fruition. (not to push blame on anyone, but it's true). If/when we list on top 5, and our price goes up, I along with many others would have no issue donating for something we believe in feeling confident our promises would be reached.


Personally, I think the DAO (which has been pitched around but not happened) would solve this. Imagine as a community we could fundraise 10 billion hoge for developers, but there is a contract that says each week only 1% can be removed unless the price is above "x price" or had some sort of incentive to keep from saying, "well I know everyone donated a total of $100,000 but we dropped 50% so we are going to sell it all and use the $50k on this tiny listing" That is not prudent. We need a war chest, just like you said, we need to have the money ready to go for a listing and what better way than having a pot that we know won't just be dumped. It will be held and slowly spent as milestones like 1c, 10c, etc. are met.
I absolutely agree with everything you said. However, there’s a strong incentive for people to help build bitcoin with mining, overall dominance in the crypto space, etc.

I will never invest in clear shit coins like safemoon and floki that rely on scam influencers and lies, so I absolutely hear you on that. It kills me when I see HOGE compared to coins like safemoon/floki/etc as we all know what they’re about. It also devalues our mission and overall crypto community.

I also agree that the ball has been dropped too many times and the promises made haven’t been kept. If we had gotten the top 5 listing or had some transparency as to where we were in the actual process, I would also feel confident about donating again.

I’m not familiar as I should be with the war chest, but I like that concept. If we did have a community tax where the community voted on where funds should be allocated (every month or quarter) would that still carry the same decentralized value?

Either way, I like all of your points and think we need to be strategic on how HOGE keeps moving forward…not just for the next few months but for years to come.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2021
Messages
7
Hi Emp, thanks for taking the time to read and give your reaction. When I was talking to some of the authors of the document I quoted, I also was initially opposed to an upgrade to the V2 contract for many of the reasons you outlined. I think you expressed yourself very clearly, but if I ever misrepresent what your point was please correct me as I’m not doing so intentionally.


ITEM 1: PROMISES MADE


Raising half a million dollars worth of value from the community in order to get an exchange listing is an incredible accomplishment. You speak of promises not kept though… true, but *why* isn’t that promise being kept? Why aren’t we being listed on a top 5 as was our goal?


Don’t gloss over that. What’s the reason? It isn’t as if we just shrugged our shoulders and said “meh, I don’t feel like picking up the phone and doing what we said we would.” It’s not for lack of trying, I can assure you. The reason we’re not following through on the promise is because it isn’t up to us. There was a non-binding agreement of how much a listing would cost. The exchange pulled out when they understood that we could only turn off the reflections to their wallet, not the tax. Bottom line, they won’t list us due to our taxation/reflection tokenomics. Period. Exchanges COULD theoretically do a lot of things such as distributing them or giving them to charity, but they won’t, and we can’t make them.


So what do you propose should happen to fulfill that promise and get us on a top 5, if not a V2?


The V1 contract is already renounced, so I can’t think of any other way. But if you can, I’m all ears.


ITEM 2: DEV WALLET


This is probably going to be the most controversial point, but fortunately it isn’t a requirement to implement a V2.


It would be nice to be able to pay devs if we actually want progress to get made on our projects. We can’t rely on volunteer labor forever. People eventually drift off to join or start projects where they can actually receive compensation. I’ll use myself as an example. As gung ho as I am, even I rarely still write about HOGE these days, because so many other projects will pay me to write. Why indefinitely work for free? Hogeman probably isn’t going to work on anything other than HAI from here on out, and he isn’t obligated to. No volunteers are.


If we don’t have a way to reward people for the energy they put into HOGE, then don’t expect much more energy to get put into HOGE. At least not compared to what people would be willing to contribute if we gave them some tokens to work and got them invested.


Besides, what’s the point of voting in a DAO that doesn’t have any funds to distribute?


But again, this is technically an add-on feature and not a requirement for us to fix the problems that need to be addressed in order for us to get a top 5 listing.


So this is something that will be a subject of a lot of debate. Please don’t get the impression that I or anyone else believes we have the final say on this item which will certainly require a community decision.


ITEM 3: LIQUIDITY UNLOCK


I’m not speculating. I’ve spoken to some of the main liquidity providers, and they definitely don’t want to kill HOGE. They love the project. But let’s be real - the volume on Ethereum just isn’t there to justify keeping their liquidity locked indefinitely.


BSC only has something like 1.2% of the tokens bridged over, and yet it accounts for 20% of the trade volume. That’s just a glimpse of the kind of trade volume that’s happening on that network that other tokens are enjoying. That’s where liquidity should be deployed, not on Ethereum.


But inconveniently, Ethereum is where all our tokens are. And that’s where they’ll stay, idle, unless we upgrade to a V2. No one is going to spend $80 in Eth gas to buy or sell $200 of HOGE, nor to move it across the bridge where they can finally trade on Matic or BSC. It just doesn’t make sense to. So the tokens are just going to stay stuck on Ethereum, essentially dead, not trading unless we get a V2 in place that airdrops from another chain.


Trade volume, and not sentimentality, is what liquidity providers are interested in. We can’t achieve very much volume with Ethereum gas costs as high as they are. So again, we need to redeploy on a different chain and just airdrop everyone (but don’t worry, we’ll be bridged to ETH, in case there’s any die-hard masochists out there who love paying $50-100+ per transaction and want to move back to ETH for whatever reason).


ITEM 4: TAX


The whole post wasn’t arguing against a tax per se, it was arguing against an inflexible tax that can’t be changed as our circumstances change. Again, speculators will gladly pay a 5% tax (or even more… Safemoon’s was 10%) in order to be early and get rich. But eventually, people aren’t early, the top becomes obvious, and the token flatlines and dies out. There are thousands of tokens all over BSC that have played out that same pattern.


What makes us different is that we are really trying to build utility for our token (I.e. governance token to a DAO, use in an NFT marketplace, etc…). But unlike speculators, users won’t tolerate taxes, not when so many tokens offer the same services without a tax.


So to reiterate, I am in favor of taxes initially as a way to bootstrap liquidity, but I am against a tax in the long run, and I am especially against a tax that we can’t turn off in order to get listed on exchanges.


I hope this clarifies these topics, and I want to reiterate that I was initially opposed to V2 as well. But as I came to understand the situation in greater depth, I changed my mind. I hope readers will be open to changing your minds as well as you learn more about where we stand and what our challenges are.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2021
Messages
5
Thank you for the well written article Jesse, it helps me understand some of these issues that would otherwise be over my head.

I don’t want to turn this into a discussion about the top-5, or any other exchange, but as you mentioned, they are closely related. For the community to have an intelligent and informed discussion about migrating to V2, we need to better understand how V1 is preventing us from listing on exchanges.

One of the challenges our community has faced is the lack of official news coming from those in the know. Rumors and half-truths being regularly discussed has led some to feel a lack of transparency and trust. How are we to understand this comment Jesse-
“We can’t get listed on the big exchanges despite having successfully raised the funds.”?
Is this a fact based on some knowledge that you have, or a viewpoint based on observation? Your statement is seemingly true, and while I don’t disagree, I feel that the community needs clarity from the business development team here, otherwise this is just another rumor, dumping gas on the fire.

Our NDA’s certainly need to be honored, but surely some insight can be given. How many exchanges are refusing to list us based on our tokenomics? Is the top 5 exchange that previously offered a listing now off the table? Is the top-5 (or other upper tier exchanges) absolutely not listing Hoge without a V2 migration?

The top 5 exchange discussion will keep tripping us up until we list, or we clearly understand what has to happen to get us there. Transparency without breaking NDA’s is very important to fully understanding this topic.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2021
Messages
7
I can't provide the exact quote or cite the biz dev who told me, so let me clarify that "we can't get listed on the big exchanges despite having raised the funds" is my belief, based on my impression of what biz devs have told me of the conversations they've had.

This isn't necessarily insider info though, because I can't name any taxed reflect token on any top exchange.

That said, these top exchanges are centralized, and they can do whatever they want. Tomorrow CZ could announce from Twitter "forget tokenomics problems, those HOGE memes are so dank, I simply must list it!" But I have no reasons to believe any exchange owners will do that.
 
Joined
May 10, 2021
Messages
19
Thank you for the well written article Jesse, it helps me understand some of these issues that would otherwise be over my head.

I don’t want to turn this into a discussion about the top-5, or any other exchange, but as you mentioned, they are closely related. For the community to have an intelligent and informed discussion about migrating to V2, we need to better understand how V1 is preventing us from listing on exchanges.

One of the challenges our community has faced is the lack of official news coming from those in the know. Rumors and half-truths being regularly discussed has led some to feel a lack of transparency and trust. How are we to understand this comment Jesse-
“We can’t get listed on the big exchanges despite having successfully raised the funds.”?
Is this a fact based on some knowledge that you have, or a viewpoint based on observation? Your statement is seemingly true, and while I don’t disagree, I feel that the community needs clarity from the business development team here, otherwise this is just another rumor, dumping gas on the fire.

Our NDA’s certainly need to be honored, but surely some insight can be given. How many exchanges are refusing to list us based on our tokenomics? Is the top 5 exchange that previously offered a listing now off the table? Is the top-5 (or other upper tier exchanges) absolutely not listing Hoge without a V2 migration?

The top 5 exchange discussion will keep tripping us up until we list, or we clearly understand what has to happen to get us there. Transparency without breaking NDA’s is very important to fully understanding this topic.
I 100% agree with everything you said here.

If the inability to turn off reflections is causing exchanges not to list us, we need to fix that. We also need some clarification and a factual understanding that this is the reason. In my opinion if v1 is a barrier to growth and hindering our ability to make partnerships and scale, V2 is needed and we just need to find the right path forward.

Going back to my common theme, we need to keep the community informed and aligned on all platforms. As you mentioned, rumors and half truths spread like a wild fire when the community is fractionalized and not on the same page. It sounds like the main source of info is always coming from telegram, but doesn’t always get relayed to the other mediums or only certain facts make their way over. If telegram is the main truth for HOGE info, let’s set up a twitch channel that live streams the chat and pin those links on Reddit, discord, etc.

There’s a number of ways we can fix this and that might be more crucial than ever if we migrate to v2.
 

Emp

Joined
Apr 6, 2021
Messages
19
Hi Emp, thanks for taking the time to read and give your reaction. When I was talking to some of the authors of the document I quoted, I also was initially opposed to an upgrade to the V2 contract for many of the reasons you outlined. I think you expressed yourself very clearly, but if I ever misrepresent what your point was please correct me as I’m not doing so intentionally.


ITEM 1: PROMISES MADE


Raising half a million dollars worth of value from the community in order to get an exchange listing is an incredible accomplishment. You speak of promises not kept though… true, but *why* isn’t that promise being kept? Why aren’t we being listed on a top 5 as was our goal?


Don’t gloss over that. What’s the reason? It isn’t as if we just shrugged our shoulders and said “meh, I don’t feel like picking up the phone and doing what we said we would.” It’s not for lack of trying, I can assure you. The reason we’re not following through on the promise is because it isn’t up to us. There was a non-binding agreement of how much a listing would cost. The exchange pulled out when they understood that we could only turn off the reflections to their wallet, not the tax. Bottom line, they won’t list us due to our taxation/reflection tokenomics. Period. Exchanges COULD theoretically do a lot of things such as distributing them or giving them to charity, but they won’t, and we can’t make them.


So what do you propose should happen to fulfill that promise and get us on a top 5, if not a V2?


The V1 contract is already renounced, so I can’t think of any other way. But if you can, I’m all ears.


ITEM 2: DEV WALLET


This is probably going to be the most controversial point, but fortunately it isn’t a requirement to implement a V2.


It would be nice to be able to pay devs if we actually want progress to get made on our projects. We can’t rely on volunteer labor forever. People eventually drift off to join or start projects where they can actually receive compensation. I’ll use myself as an example. As gung ho as I am, even I rarely still write about HOGE these days, because so many other projects will pay me to write. Why indefinitely work for free? Hogeman probably isn’t going to work on anything other than HAI from here on out, and he isn’t obligated to. No volunteers are.


If we don’t have a way to reward people for the energy they put into HOGE, then don’t expect much more energy to get put into HOGE. At least not compared to what people would be willing to contribute if we gave them some tokens to work and got them invested.


Besides, what’s the point of voting in a DAO that doesn’t have any funds to distribute?


But again, this is technically an add-on feature and not a requirement for us to fix the problems that need to be addressed in order for us to get a top 5 listing.


So this is something that will be a subject of a lot of debate. Please don’t get the impression that I or anyone else believes we have the final say on this item which will certainly require a community decision.


ITEM 3: LIQUIDITY UNLOCK


I’m not speculating. I’ve spoken to some of the main liquidity providers, and they definitely don’t want to kill HOGE. They love the project. But let’s be real - the volume on Ethereum just isn’t there to justify keeping their liquidity locked indefinitely.


BSC only has something like 1.2% of the tokens bridged over, and yet it accounts for 20% of the trade volume. That’s just a glimpse of the kind of trade volume that’s happening on that network that other tokens are enjoying. That’s where liquidity should be deployed, not on Ethereum.


But inconveniently, Ethereum is where all our tokens are. And that’s where they’ll stay, idle, unless we upgrade to a V2. No one is going to spend $80 in Eth gas to buy or sell $200 of HOGE, nor to move it across the bridge where they can finally trade on Matic or BSC. It just doesn’t make sense to. So the tokens are just going to stay stuck on Ethereum, essentially dead, not trading unless we get a V2 in place that airdrops from another chain.


Trade volume, and not sentimentality, is what liquidity providers are interested in. We can’t achieve very much volume with Ethereum gas costs as high as they are. So again, we need to redeploy on a different chain and just airdrop everyone (but don’t worry, we’ll be bridged to ETH, in case there’s any die-hard masochists out there who love paying $50-100+ per transaction and want to move back to ETH for whatever reason).


ITEM 4: TAX


The whole post wasn’t arguing against a tax per se, it was arguing against an inflexible tax that can’t be changed as our circumstances change. Again, speculators will gladly pay a 5% tax (or even more… Safemoon’s was 10%) in order to be early and get rich. But eventually, people aren’t early, the top becomes obvious, and the token flatlines and dies out. There are thousands of tokens all over BSC that have played out that same pattern.


What makes us different is that we are really trying to build utility for our token (I.e. governance token to a DAO, use in an NFT marketplace, etc…). But unlike speculators, users won’t tolerate taxes, not when so many tokens offer the same services without a tax.


So to reiterate, I am in favor of taxes initially as a way to bootstrap liquidity, but I am against a tax in the long run, and I am especially against a tax that we can’t turn off in order to get listed on exchanges.


I hope this clarifies these topics, and I want to reiterate that I was initially opposed to V2 as well. But as I came to understand the situation in greater depth, I changed my mind. I hope readers will be open to changing your minds as well as you learn more about where we stand and what our challenges are.
"Bottom line, they won’t list us due to our taxation/reflection tokenomics. Period. Exchanges COULD theoretically do a lot of things such as distributing them or giving them to charity, but they won’t, and we can’t make them."

Is this a fact? I have listened to every meeting from business dev team and they indicated we are under a review, and while there are many speculations are you confirming that

1) we were denied
2) the reason we are denied is tokenomics
3) exchanges have confirmed a request to distribute or donate is denied?


All I know is WhiteBIT donates the funds to charity and that's quite nice; I feel the worst-case scenario is an exchange would just keep any tokens they get. I've yet to hear a case where they won't list us for that alone.

Also, it feels like you are bashing on ETH a lot. There's a reason we are on ETH. ETH is a trusted network. I hate gas fees, you hate gas fees, everyone hates gas fees, yet, it is the 2nd most popular network? Why, because people trust it. Coinbase refused to list BSC and you'll notice they haven't listed any BSC coins either. People bought HOGE knowing we were ETH not a bsc project. The long-term pros vastly outweigh the short term waiting.

Shib got listed because it's on the ETH network. ETH 2.0 would solve the gas fees, a listing on an exchange with a USD pair would solve gas fees, our bridges to BSC do solve GAS fees.


You mention, "BSC only has something like 1.2% of the tokens bridged over, and yet it accounts for 20% of the trade volume. That’s just a glimpse of the kind of trade volume that’s happening on that network that other tokens are enjoying. That’s where liquidity should be deployed,"

Okay, so if the big liquidity providers pull eth liquidity and move it to BSC, then that is fine; there will be less liquidity on Uniswap but maybe for the time being, we have other exchanges to access hoge. Why does Uniswap need to be #1?

People like me who have added a solid amount to ETH will still have it there for those who want to trade & I'll collect any even larger slice of the fees. In fact, some of those big holders leaving will be good long term so we stay more decentralized.

I agree it's good to adapt but quickly rushing things and spreading talk about "hoge is going to die" seems like unnecessary panic and good way to get even more people to give up on us.
 
Joined
Apr 8, 2021
Messages
7
"Bottom line, they won’t list us due to our taxation/reflection tokenomics. Period. Exchanges COULD theoretically do a lot of things such as distributing them or giving them to charity, but they won’t, and we can’t make them."

Is this a fact? I have listened to every meeting from business dev team and they indicated we are under a review, and while there are many speculations are you confirming that

1) we were denied
2) the reason we are denied is tokenomics
3) exchanges have confirmed a request to distribute or donate is denied?


All I know is WhiteBIT donates the funds to charity and that's quite nice; I feel the worst-case scenario is an exchange would just keep any tokens they get. I've yet to hear a case where they won't list us for that alone.

Also, it feels like you are bashing on ETH a lot. There's a reason we are on ETH. ETH is a trusted network. I hate gas fees, you hate gas fees, everyone hates gas fees, yet, it is the 2nd most popular network? Why, because people trust it. Coinbase refused to list BSC and you'll notice they haven't listed any BSC coins either. People bought HOGE knowing we were ETH not a bsc project. The long-term pros vastly outweigh the short term waiting.

Shib got listed because it's on the ETH network. ETH 2.0 would solve the gas fees, a listing on an exchange with a USD pair would solve gas fees, our bridges to BSC do solve GAS fees.


You mention, "BSC only has something like 1.2% of the tokens bridged over, and yet it accounts for 20% of the trade volume. That’s just a glimpse of the kind of trade volume that’s happening on that network that other tokens are enjoying. That’s where liquidity should be deployed,"

Okay, so if the big liquidity providers pull eth liquidity and move it to BSC, then that is fine; there will be less liquidity on Uniswap but maybe for the time being, we have other exchanges to access hoge. Why does Uniswap need to be #1?

People like me who have added a solid amount to ETH will still have it there for those who want to trade & I'll collect any even larger slice of the fees. In fact, some of those big holders leaving will be good long term so we stay more decentralized.

I agree it's good to adapt but quickly rushing things and spreading talk about "hoge is going to die" seems like unnecessary panic and good way to get even more people to give

"Bottom line, they won’t list us due to our taxation/reflection tokenomics. Period. Exchanges COULD theoretically do a lot of things such as distributing them or giving them to charity, but they won’t, and we can’t make them."

Is this a fact? I have listened to every meeting from business dev team and they indicated we are under a review, and while there are many speculations are you confirming that

1) we were denied
2) the reason we are denied is tokenomics
3) exchanges have confirmed a request to distribute or donate is denied?


All I know is WhiteBIT donates the funds to charity and that's quite nice; I feel the worst-case scenario is an exchange would just keep any tokens they get. I've yet to hear a case where they won't list us for that alone.

Also, it feels like you are bashing on ETH a lot. There's a reason we are on ETH. ETH is a trusted network. I hate gas fees, you hate gas fees, everyone hates gas fees, yet, it is the 2nd most popular network? Why, because people trust it. Coinbase refused to list BSC and you'll notice they haven't listed any BSC coins either. People bought HOGE knowing we were ETH not a bsc project. The long-term pros vastly outweigh the short term waiting.

Shib got listed because it's on the ETH network. ETH 2.0 would solve the gas fees, a listing on an exchange with a USD pair would solve gas fees, our bridges to BSC do solve GAS fees.


You mention, "BSC only has something like 1.2% of the tokens bridged over, and yet it accounts for 20% of the trade volume. That’s just a glimpse of the kind of trade volume that’s happening on that network that other tokens are enjoying. That’s where liquidity should be deployed,"

Okay, so if the big liquidity providers pull eth liquidity and move it to BSC, then that is fine; there will be less liquidity on Uniswap but maybe for the time being, we have other exchanges to access hoge. Why does Uniswap need to be #1?

People like me who have added a solid amount to ETH will still have it there for those who want to trade & I'll collect any even larger slice of the fees. In fact, some of those big holders leaving will be good long term so we stay more decentralized.

I agree it's good to adapt but quickly rushing things and spreading talk about "hoge is going to die" seems like unnecessary panic and good way to get even more people to give up on us.
If you watch his most recent interview on Bankless, even Vitalik acknowledges that there is no future for retail on L1. Users will HAVE to migrate to L2s or alternative L1s. That section starts at about 30 mins in.


Doing retail defi on L1 is like riding a skateboard on the freeway. It's not the place for it.

Next up... point blank, we would already be listed on a top 5 if not for our tokenomics. That IS the sticking point (specifically the fact we can't whitelist them to exclude from tax). If that changes (for example because of a V2) then my understanding is that they'll be happy to list us. You can ask at the next AMA if my understanding is correct or incorrect.

Fair enough that I am not the one directly talking with the exchanges so this is my honest, candid interpretation of what has been said to me but it is not official. That being the case, you're welcome to hold out hope that I'm mistaken in my interpretation and that the exchange's review process will come up favorable for HOGE V1.

As for me, I'm just trying to be forthright in saying that I no longer hold out hope of a V1 top 5 listing at this time, and it doesn't seem to me like the biz devs do anymore either. No, I don't remember the exact words said and I'm reluctant to put words in anyone's else's mouth, so I'll just let them speak for themselves in the AMAs.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2021
Messages
5
I can't provide the exact quote or cite the biz dev who told me, so let me clarify that "we can't get listed on the big exchanges despite having raised the funds" is my belief, based on my impression of what biz devs have told me of the conversations they've had.

This isn't necessarily insider info though, because I can't name any taxed reflect token on any top exchange.

That said, these top exchanges are centralized, and they can do whatever they want. Tomorrow CZ could announce from Twitter "forget tokenomics problems, those HOGE memes are so dank, I simply must list it!" But I have no reasons to believe any exchange owners will do that.
Thanks for your reply Jesse, I agree with you, further partnerships with the bigger exchanges seem like a long shot at this point.

I’d love for someone from the team who has been involved in the discussions with exchanges to comment. If these partnerships we want aren’t possible at this time, the community needs to hear that directly from the source in a formal way (planned and focused AMA, etc.)

If, as a community we have unrealized expectations, that doesn’t mean anyone who was involved is at fault or the matter was mishandled, but it does have to be cleaned up if we are to continue moving forward successfully. I appreciate a positive sentiment as much as the next guy, but the time for statements such as “it’s not a matter of if, but when” has passed. We need transparency on this issue to fully understand the V1-V2 discussion.

Just for the sake of clarity, no fud here. I truly believe in this project and have the utmost respect for anyone who sacrifices their time, energy and resources to help it progress. Thank you to everyone who participates, I love you all!
 
Joined
May 29, 2021
Messages
56
"Bottom line, they won’t list us due to our taxation/reflection tokenomics. Period. Exchanges COULD theoretically do a lot of things such as distributing them or giving them to charity, but they won’t, and we can’t make them."

Is this a fact? I have listened to every meeting from business dev team and they indicated we are under a review, and while there are many speculations are you confirming that

1) we were denied
2) the reason we are denied is tokenomics
3) exchanges have confirmed a request to distribute or donate is denied?


All I know is WhiteBIT donates the funds to charity and that's quite nice; I feel the worst-case scenario is an exchange would just keep any tokens they get. I've yet to hear a case where they won't list us for that alone.

Also, it feels like you are bashing on ETH a lot. There's a reason we are on ETH. ETH is a trusted network. I hate gas fees, you hate gas fees, everyone hates gas fees, yet, it is the 2nd most popular network? Why, because people trust it. Coinbase refused to list BSC and you'll notice they haven't listed any BSC coins either. People bought HOGE knowing we were ETH not a bsc project. The long-term pros vastly outweigh the short term waiting.

Shib got listed because it's on the ETH network. ETH 2.0 would solve the gas fees, a listing on an exchange with a USD pair would solve gas fees, our bridges to BSC do solve GAS fees.


You mention, "BSC only has something like 1.2% of the tokens bridged over, and yet it accounts for 20% of the trade volume. That’s just a glimpse of the kind of trade volume that’s happening on that network that other tokens are enjoying. That’s where liquidity should be deployed,"

Okay, so if the big liquidity providers pull eth liquidity and move it to BSC, then that is fine; there will be less liquidity on Uniswap but maybe for the time being, we have other exchanges to access hoge. Why does Uniswap need to be #1?

People like me who have added a solid amount to ETH will still have it there for those who want to trade & I'll collect any even larger slice of the fees. In fact, some of those big holders leaving will be good long term so we stay more decentralized.

I agree it's good to adapt but quickly rushing things and spreading talk about "hoge is going to die" seems like unnecessary panic and good way to get even more people to give up on us.


1. WhiteBIT seems like an exception. We can't rely on that exception being the standard going forward (be it Coinbase, Binance, Crypto.com, etc.). If they want X, would we not jump through any hoops to make it so? Right now, we simply cannot.

2. Ethereum is fine. It's not going anywhere IMO. It will be around probably forever as will ERC-20 tokens IMO. Not sure why V2 necessarily means we are de-coupling from Ethereum. We can still be on ETH and have multiple chains (not too dissimilar from what it is now).

3. Coinbase refusing to list BSC is not an argument. There weren't even many notable BSC tokens (if really any) until last March or so (Safemoon, et. al.). Coinbase doesn't list BNB (maybe because it is the native token to Binance and Binance is its biggest competitor). This doesn't mean much though. They also don't list tokens like Fantom (yet) and took forever to list Cardano.

4. People bought Hoge because it was a memecoin and was fun and seemed to have a lot of people interested in building for it. "People bought HOGE knowing we were ETH not a bsc project" is a wildly speculative and completely unsupported assertion as the exact opposite is more likely. People bought and are buying Hoge irregardless of what chain or exchange it is on.

5. "Shib got listed because it's on the ETH network". Says who? Perhaps Shib got listed because it was booming like no other, likely has massive venture capital money, has actual utility (they are gunning to kill uniswap), and they have ZERO tokenomics. Stop making up nonsense.

6. ETH 2.0 would solve the gas fee. Yes, absolutely and when is that coming? Soon? No one knows for sure. If you want to sit and wait for it, that's fine, but asking everyone else to sit and wait for it is not really reasonable either when we could make moves to help *now*. What if takes another 2 years? Is everyone going to be fine with that? What we are trying to do IMO is add flexibility and bring power back to ourselves - not simply rely on external forces to do this or that.

7. No one's quickly rushing anything. We have literally 5-6 months to refine this. While the question of Hoge dying or not dying is up in the air, the fact remains that we should *do* something when we have an opportunity to. This community craves action and things to do, sitting idle is not really in our forte. If you want to sit it out, that's fine. If you want to actively help with seeing what a V2 can or cannot do that's great too. Complaining that the status quo is the best just because is not really moving the needle one way or another IMO. There's a bunch of people out there, that are researching and/or creating content that only aims to help Hoge. Whether or not that help is good or not is up for debate, but at least there are people out there trying to find solutions for problems that exist. And yes, problems do exist and yes we can make them better.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 14, 2022
Messages
2
Jesse, Hoge Devs:

Thanks for taking the time to discuss all the technical aspects of V1 vs V2. As a first time/long time on hoge.nation, reddit, and twitter...I invested a significant amount in hoge and have watched the news with interest over the past year. I've appreciate your writing on the topic as well. However, I'm going to be blunt. Right now, you (I'm gonna say you alot, that's the royal "you" which includes you, the dev team,e tc, not you personally) have a credibility problem. That's just as a big a problem as all the reasons why V2 is better than V1 or vice versa or BSC v. ETH or etc. You can't write articles for 9 months talking about how great HOGE is, how great deflationary aspects are, and how the coin is unique, how it's "CERTIK-audited", hype a top 5 age exchange with $500k of donated funds, then turn around and start to backtrack after you've collected the money. Consider the following statement from reddit" not a matter of if but when. its been communicated that we have done everything on our side to be listed there" Mon NOv 8 2021) Prior to collecting the 500,000, you didn't say that the tax was a problem. You didn't say the deflationary aspect was an issue (it was one of "the" reasons to invest). If the team didn't know and it was a simple error or misunderstanding, tough! that's business! You need to own it and make it right. Now, no one can predict the future, maybe this v1 v. v2 things works out and i make oodles of money down the road when i sell my hoge. But right now, I would appreciate the dev team show some credibility and do everything they can to get a top 5 exchange or 3 top 20 exchanges or something with that $500k. Saying everything that was "great" about the coin is now a "problem" is not going to cut it even if there is some truth to it. And then there's the credibility issue with the way egoh was rolled out - don't forget that! Ultimately, fix your credibility first, then fix the coin.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 8, 2021
Messages
7
Jesse, Hoge Devs:

Thanks for taking the time to discuss all the technical aspects of V1 vs V2. As a first time/long time on hoge.nation, reddit, and twitter...I invested a significant amount in hoge and have watched the news with interest over the past year. I've appreciate your writing on the topic as well. However, I'm going to be blunt. Right now, you (I'm gonna say you alot, that's the royal "you" which includes you, the dev team,e tc, not you personally) have a credibility problem. That's just as a big a problem as all the reasons why V2 is better than V1 or vice versa or BSC v. ETH or etc. You can't write articles for 9 months talking about how great HOGE is, how great deflationary aspects are, and how the coin is unique, how it's "CERTIK-audited", hype a top 5 age exchange with $500k of donated funds, then turn around and start to backtrack after you've collected the money. Consider the following statement from reddit" not a matter of if but when. its been communicated that we have done everything on our side to be listed there" Mon NOv 8 2021) Prior to collecting the 500,000, you didn't say that the tax was a problem. You didn't say the deflationary aspect was an issue (it was one of "the" reasons to invest). If the team didn't know and it was a simple error or misunderstanding, tough! that's business! You need to own it and make it right. Now, no one can predict the future, maybe this v1 v. v2 things works out and i make oodles of money down the road when i sell my hoge. But right now, I would appreciate the dev team show some credibility and do everything they can to get a top 5 exchange or 3 top 20 exchanges or something with that $500k. Saying everything that was "great" about the coin is now a "problem" is not going to cut it even if there is some truth to it. And then there's the credibility issue with the way egoh was rolled out - don't forget that! Ultimately, fix your credibility first, then fix the coin.
Thanks for the feedback, and I agree that there is a credibility problem which is unavoidable when we've been promised and have been contributing to a top 5 exchange, but then after raising the funds it hasn't happened.

As for my articles, I myself was bitterly disappointed when the USA Today article I wrote had such a minimal and short-lived impact. I admitted that frustration on Twitter (which I probably shouldn't have publicly I guess), and I also took a break from writing, in part to self reflect on why things weren't going the way I thought they should. Also I wanted to concentrate on learning to program. Talk about frustrating!

Anyway, I agree that expectations haven't come to fruition. I also agree that my view on taxes is complicated and seems contradictory. I guess what I'm trying to convey is that something thats an advantage in one circumstance can become a liability in another.

Your commentary on credibility is part of why my latest article is so devoid of sugarcoating. It was a lot more like a bandaid that needed to be ripped off than a cheerleading session. It didn't make everyone happy, that's for sure. But a lot of people appreciated the candor of reading what I really think, and I think thats an important step towards better credibility.
 
Top Bottom