I believe as this is the largest Dao in the world it perhaps has the most responsibility to be the best it can. I would really like to see more decentralisation-the D in Dao. It’s half way there and please do not feel this as a criticism. Jup and Jupiter team and community are doing great things. But currently due to the voting power setup, it’s getting more and more centralised.
2 Likes
Yes, we’ve realized that in the WG model there are roughly 3 key roles: Full time, part time, and contributors.
Sourcing contributors at a moment’s notice has helped tremendously in the past with crucial tasks with deadlines and from our experience the community is extremely willing to help here.
Having a better way to source people who want to help in this capacity is a must.
6 Likes
Thank you for taking the initiative!
1 Like
Pay folks from the community who have in-depth knowledge of everything that is happening in the Jupiverse and run this 24hrs spaces on X as that is the place that have the most amount of outside reach…( think a call center for the DAO )
A Team of say 3-6 ppl should be able to do this in shifts
2 Likes
First off, stop banning people from Discord for the most ridiculous reasons. Discord is the only place where investors, developers, etc., can find up-to-date information that isn’t readily available elsewhere.
As for me, I was banned over an eggplant emoji—yes, this 
.
I want access to the Jupiter Discord, as I’m a developer.
1 Like
-
Leaders of the DAO to communicate vision and inspire, current state of DAO leadership is technocracy, work groups, KPIs, strict list etc, we need leaders who will read popular proposals and advocate for them independently by their executive presence, by their gravitas, instead of simply being reduced as leaders to moderators of community, unmuters muters on X spaces, and work group coordinators.
-
Buybacks are very naive solution POPULISM that quickly become baseline under bots, leverage traders, market makers and centralized exchanges, algorithms adapt to buybucks, they even adapted to BITCOIN ETFs and there is only 21M of Bitcoin. Guess what difference buybucks make for BILLONS OF JUP - none ( well well I calculated 0.6% on price a year based on daily volume )
-
DAO Leaders ( again ) to acknowledge that fundamental promise by leadership of DAO and leadership of JUP.AG has been broken. That value/growth of JUP token is positively correlated to value of JUP.AG and products, this is not true, until this fact is acknowledged, there can be no solutions as all solutions should be innovative and revolutionary approach that goes beyond simplistic idea that that if JUP.AG is popular and best product out there that JUP is growing. Facts are we see that JUP.AG grew XXX% in users and fees, and JUP did not grow at all.
-
Leaders of DAO to go beyond simple blanket wave offs, that everything is down. Everything is down, but nothing is quiet down like JUP is. And when thing go up, everything will go UP but JUP wont go UP as much. Facts.
-
Leaders of DAO to find a way to educate community about basic monetary theory, that printing money ( ASR, Grants, Rewards, Jupurary ) does not equal = Purchasing power. Meaning more JUP is given away, less people value it, price is going down since ATH 1.83 as everyone is laser focused on waiting for “welfare check” not buying. All this drama is nothing more then frustration people kept inside for long time. All drama is not about the 2030 Vote. Happy people don´t cause so much stir if they were happy before the vote.
-
Leaders of DAO to find in their hearts bravery, to recommend something to JUP.AG team, that goes beyond look at this cool banner I Made, look at this cool docs we made. Something that would associate, correlate, formalize Performance of JUP Token with performance of JUP.AG. There is lot of proposal of that sort on the forum, read some, LEAD SOME, FIGHT FOR SOME.
-
Community to stop being petty about developers compensations, and asking stupid questions about who are the people, what are their tasks, etc, this is not problem, problem is that entire community waiting for hand outs. Buy some JUP. Once Leaders of DAO and leaders of JUP.ag give you a proper reason.
-
Jup.AG team and DAO Leadership team to find way to make JUP more then governance token. Most of 2024 they spent ignoring JUP and promoting that JLP. JUP was not mentioned anywhere on Calls, Tweets, even on DISCORD. It was all about JLP JLP JLP. Then October they started to talk about JUP, because about then they started to develop some plans about strategic reserve and had to make plans for Jupurary. Its time to move beyond opportunistic focus on JUP, and make it your mission JUP.AG Team. I think, you are there, considering that 10000 people on twitter want to lynch you.
Thats it I hope nobody offended.
Thanks. Change Of Fee Distribution
4 Likes
Throwing some idea’s out there… not sure if the DAO will have a lot of influence on these tbh…
What IF:
JUP had it’s own kind of LEDGER → IRL JUP hardware wallet → discount for stakers.
JUP had merch? JUP LOGO T-Shirts, caps, …
JUP had it’s own debit card. (Maybe instead of instant staking the ASR → Make a claim option with → put on debit / Stake…
JUP had a locking mechanism like bonk? The longer you stake the more rewards!
JUP Discord should have a channel for people who are actually involved and have a set amount staked (for example 200 JUP)… Right now the general channel feels like a place where people come to troll the actual holders… and there is no channel which can bring peace of mind in times of FUD.
I believe I am not the correct person to forward these idea’s so I give my permission to do with these as the DAO pleases… If you feel like any of these are good enough feel free to drop them to the team as well!
Best of luck!
JUP IS HOME!
2 Likes
Actually I kinda disagree on your point - people don’t buy Jup as they are waiting on a welfare check.
Personally I would not buy Jup right now as I am better off waiting for the bear market. Sure could I miss the big alt season that may still come. Perhaps.
But the main reason for disagreement is that I feel, just me here, thé jupuary airdrop had the potential to onboard a lot of new users to the Dao. But for that to work you kinda had to make it worth it for them.
For instance having used Jupiter exchange organically around 2000 times in 2024 I received 250 jup. Thanks by the way. I staked it. I can see by the numbers that some joined. But I think a lot of new people in the same situation felt perhaps large capital got all the allocation. So it did very little for onboarding new long term users. Personally I have no interest what the team get’s paid. Well to a point right. Except it may centralise the Dao further? But it’s the same for the community. The more you have staked perhaps the more you are engaged with the Dao and community on social platforms. I believe a big opportunity was missed by rewarding big capital over genuine daily users.
2 Likes
Hi Tdev, can you please share your Discord username and user ID?
3 Likes
There should be a clear distinction between DAO stakers, active voters in the community, and regular users who freely choose which DEX to use for swapping. The majority of concerns regarding price movements, DEX preferences, and DAO decisions come from different types of users. To ensure fairness and sustainability, a mechanism should be implemented to prioritize DAO participants over casual users.
1 Like
This is my discord username/id :thorthumb00
2 Likes
I appreciate your response slorg
Let’s gather the best comments and ideas and get to work together.
I really liked @0xRay idea 
3 Likes
MCGA - Making CWG hours Great Again
Right now the CWG hours every Monday is primarily for status updates across WGs and questions from members.
But it can be an opportunity to build excitement. It can be the DAO equivalent of planetary call.
Suggestions
- Sneak Peek: Announcing beforehand the key topics and updates to be shared in the CWG hours. Not just building the excitement, it also gives an option for members to be ready with their questions or find ways to contribute to the WGs.
- Questions in advance: There can be an option for members to submit questions in advance for it to be discussed during the call. Many members have questions but may not be present in the call to ask it. Since the recording of call will be available in J&J X broadcast, in this way they can have their question answered even if they are not present during the call.
- Theme based hours: While Morten is planning to schedule open discussions in the voice chat, there can be thematic discussions as well. We decide on a theme and dedicate that hour only on that specific idea/topic.
5 Likes
For fairness to small independent contributors within the Jupiverse DAO,
(1) IDEA - A:
I want to suggest an idea of splitting any DAO future Bounties/Grants (or similar including those by Working Groups) into 2 categories:
1. Group 1 (Big Creators / Hosts & First-Class Talents)
2. Group 2 (Small Creators / Hosts & Third-Class Talents)
1. Group 1 (Big Creators / Hosts & First-Class Talents)
This group 1 contribution can be judged by the grants/bounties teams with a main focus on content production quality and reach as usual.
The current DAO/WG teams are more obsessed with content production quality and huge engagement as criteria to affirm content quality (which are not the same - I defined them below for clarity) and that is not helping the smaller creators feel fairly appreciated for their contributions within Jupiverse.
NON- Content Aspect:
It is the same for non-content-based things like events, if you gather 15-25+ people you don’t get the team’s attention and support but if it is 100-1,000+ that’s when it is considered worth supporting.
While it is good that we host events with a huge number of attendees, I have no issues with that. We should also start paying attention to smaller gatherings, it sometimes could be more effective, as fewer attendees means more interaction that can lead to long-lasting onboarding and active participation within the DAO.
My take is to let the team support both small and large events and not enforce or pay attention only to events with huge attendees)!
2. Group 2 (Small Creators / Hosts & Third-class Talents)
This group 2 contribution can be judged by the grants/bounties teams with less focus on content production quality and reach but on content quality and unique style to the creator.
Even though smaller creators might not have huge engagements on their content, they still pour their heart and effort into creating it with the resources they have (or can afford).
The same goes for hosts that have not built the capacity to host events with huge attendees, third-class independent talents building tools, websites, and dApps helping in their own little way within the Jupiverse.
NOTE:
Content Quality is how helpful is the message/solution the content provides.
WHILE
Content Production Quality is the quality that goes into conveying the content quality like the quality of the camera, microphone (audio), visuals (B-rolls, transcription, translation etc.) and editing.
This should be differentiated to reward contributors fairly.
This is currently not the case within Jupiverse DAO because those in charge seem to focus more on content production quality and huge engagement mainly and once your content gets less engagement means it has no content quality - No, it shouldn’t be so!
For example,
The $100,000 Catstanbul Contest could be divided into $50,000/$50,000 for both groups 1 and 2.
Rewards may look like:
-
Big Creator (10-25 Winners):
$2,000 - $5,000 each based on their content production quality and reach -
Small Creators (50-100 Winners):
$500 - $1,000 each based on content quality and the uniqueness of each creator’s style (without comparison to content production quality and huge engagement of big creators in group 1).
The Catstanbul bounty if followed the above method will still be able to achieve its goal of 60 winners they announced.
Because the above method will still end up with 60-125 Winners with less community discontentment as we saw with the current method the Uplinks WG used for the bounty.
We need more transparency in what the DAO team and WG do,
its not too much to ask as it will foster a healthy relationship between the team and the community and reduce FUDs where everyone both big and small contributors feel appreciated and well rewarded for their level of contribution and not placed against unrealistic standards.
(2) IDEA - B:
Lastly:
Bounties like that though it can be listed on Superteam for the team to easily check the submission and select winners. There should still be an official post on JupResearch where every participant Big/small creators MUST also share links to their content for the community to see (the community aren’t choosing the winners, the bounty team still does that - just for transparency and aligning community with the fairness of the process and reduce fuds that usually follows such winners announcement).
So, if anyone feels too big to be accountable to the DAO community by submitting their content link as a reply to the post, then they are not qualified to get the DAO’s grants/bounty no matter how influencer they are.
The Jupiverse DAO grants/bounty should be for the community and not to please first-class influencers who actually don’t care about the actual Jupiverse DAO community’s survival.
tistic Love To You All!
1 Like
I do respect your well thought out and written ideas but then I must say I don’t agree with it solely because for the catstanbul contest not everyone got paid the same range…and over here at the Jupiverse we don’t encourage any form of making anyone feel less of their self cos if that is what then is the point of the PPP we preach,
Secondly having persons without the proper knowledge of a quality content is a no to act as a judge cos it will be fatal,
Rather than saying there should be groups for small and large creators…in my opinion the right approach will be to have a collab on content creations going on within the DAO, although most persons follow this approach already.
Not to forget also that the Jupiter university is also available to help out this struggling on x to learn the right way to written threads n broaden their visibility across x
Famous clouds also gives a great lecture on how to use CapCut for great vid clips
Every big creators that was birthed from the Jupiverse simply followed this.
3 Likes
I do not say the community should judge but when the team judge and announce winners. The community have a place to check the content winners and non-winners submitted to the team and may easily call out mistakes or anything they think seems unfair.
With that, you will be amazed how the community will stand to defend the team with concrete evidence to point out whenever a fud arises after winners announcement.
The less transparent the DAO process used to select winners, the more room we allow for fuds to spread, that’s my point.
Increase transparency (can’t totally eradicate fuds because there are just people with bad intents) and you can reduce fuds to its minimal and increase trust between teams and DAO community to foster an healthier Jupiverse.
Yeah, that is why its essential we keep reminding ourselves to be PPP in our heart and actions not yesterday, today only but daily and forever.
And whenever the community felt no PPP, I think it’s not a bad idea to call it out.
You seem not to get my point here, please.
It is like you saying it is fair to pitch most YouTubers in a competition of views with Mr. Beast (no matter the quality of both their content and production), no matter the collaboration, creators will not end up with the same big channel/X account with huge influence the same level (it never happened or kindly show me any social media platform that it has happened on today - there is always differences in levels of influence and reach).
Kindly look at it from Sport’s viewpoint there a groups of under 21, and the main team for each country.
All athletes don’t compete in the same race (some 100m, 200m, marathon etc) and the same goes with wrestling. There are heavyweight etc.
Why do you refuse to see these differences realistically for what they are actually and think Jupiter University can fix all creators, then we are limiting creators in the Jupiverse because if we accept diversity in creators you quickly agree they can never be on the same level and Grants/bounties to reward them must not also be same as it will just be simply unfair!
I love and appreciate Big creators and would be there too as I continue to work hard towards it (let them be rewarded well for what they have grinded hard to achieve - many of them deserve it so no hard feeling towards them)
But don’t put them in the same competition for grants/bounties in the DAO with smaller creators, it is simply a UNFAIR advantage - no matter how you try to defend this!
1 Like
I’m curious about your reference to “third-class talents”. Are you implying that, in the DAO’s effort to support everyone in the Jupiverse, the standards should be lowered?
From what I’ve observed, the DAO actively supports micro-creators. Working Groups (WGs) have been helping community members enhance their skills; for example, Uplink organizes workshops on content creation, and the Catdets WG holds weekly sessions to review posts on X. IMHO, producing high-quality content often depends on how resourceful one is with the available tools.
From a business standpoint, there must be an exchange of value; the DAO operates on a meritocratic system. While I agree that content creators have unique styles, aligning with established expectations ensures that all contributions serve our collective goals.
I’m also curious about your aspirations within the community. Are you looking to focus on content creation, event hosting, or something else?
5 Likes
The standard and expectations are too restrictive, high and not flexible to be matched and accommodated by many independent small contributors in the Jupiverse.
And when I say high, I mean there is too much focus on “content production quality” (to a specific way) and “high engagement” over “content quality” which I never said is entirely bad, am just saying when small creator thinks in their own unique way of contributing to the Jupiverse, we need to support them and not request they must change to meet the set strict standards first before been seen to qualify for grants and supports. That’s my point and hope you got it clearly now, please!
For example,
Kindly check Solandy on YouTube, a top independent creator of developer content for Solana developers.
He mixes comedy with programming (normally that is not conventional and am sure someone like that will face the same thing am facing here now in Jupiverse if he were to be a smaller creator like me because the team can’t just accommodate his uniqueness of merging comedy and programming content as that doesn’t meet normal standards just like I was told,
he would likely be told who will watch that when there are serious programming channels to watch - he does not have fancy editing either"
But today, many Solana developers like him (myself included) for his unique style and his content still helps a lot of solana developers today.
In fact, I will be surprised if anyone tells me they have been a Solana developer for more than 3 months and never came across Solandy content on their online searches for Solana development content.
The expectations aren’t realistically accommodating and embracing the diversity of creators within the Jupiverse.
Kindly check my contributions already here:
Introducing “JupFAQAnswered” Platform + 100 Days “JupFAQAnswered” Challenge (Updated Daily)
I have no aspiration to work or be hired by Jupiter and the DAO or any Working Group (If offered, I will gladly turn it down) - I love my independence.
Am just here to contribute as an independent small creator in my own unique style and where I think I have discovered some things the DAO may be lacking or have already but need more to add.
MY GOAL:
I want to create enough Jupiter FAQ answered videos that if anyone search on google, Youtube, AI chat etc in next 1 year about Jupiter will come across my content to help them -
That is one of the bones of contention, the team have met seems not to understand that but instead wants me to conform to how others have already been creating content which is a clear NO for me - My goal is clear and all that matters is the team to support or just ignore but not water it down.
Lastly am here as a voice to say Jupiverse is a home Please lets ensure TRANSPARENCY and FAIRNESS in all we do and we will grow Jupiverse beyond our imaginations.
PS:
I would appreciate it if the team could support my 100 Days “JupFAQAnswered” challenge with a DAO grant (unconventional, yeah I know - and don’t have any amount in mind because my focus is on sustaining the content pipeline to hit a target of 200 - 300 Jupiter FAQs Answered videos within the 100 Days to have enough content to have covered almost any aspect of Jupiter FAQs.
I can achieve it because I currently answer about 1 to 4 Jupiter FAQs with videos each day of the challenge so today is Day 13 and already done 39 Jupiter FAQ Answered videos on the JupFAQAnswered Youtube Channel
So, am open to what they can offer (as long as they allow me to keep my content style and deliver it in a way I see fit for my audience not forced to conform to them when they do not even understand my audience) as I believe it will take a while to proof what am doing is working because its SEO, not conventional standard they are used to and not social media quick well polished and viral shareable content.*
(1) I have done my research including SEO,
(2) I know my target audience (beginners searching to learn about Jupiter on Google/Youtube etc) not TikTokers or X users and
(3) I have already started creating the content in the format that solves my target audience problem for about 2 weeks now through the 100 days challenge.
NOTE: Ain’t into fancy editing or anything of such because my audience isn’t after that - am not posting for virality on Tiktok or X audience - am focusing on Search audience.
Though it might not be a huge view like X but will be impactful in helping those searching out anything they want to know about Jupiter on Google, YouTube, Chatbots like ChatGPT etc) and onboard more to the Jupiverse.
tistic love to you.
Thanks for caring to actually understand what am doing within the Jupiverse!
1 Like
Now that it’s clear you’re not looking to operate within the Jupiverse, let’s focus on the other points you’ve raised. If you’re planning to pitch your idea to investors/enterprises/communities, there are key elements they will be looking for.
As an investor, here’s what I would look at:
- Is there a clear problem being solved?
- What is the value proposition?
- Who is the target audience?
- What is the potential size of this audience? (I had a look at your YouTube views)
- Content-specific: What’s the activation rate? (Is the number of active community members increasing?)
Before pitching, the idea owner should have already addressed these fundamental questions.
You mentioned that you did your research already, so I’d appreciate it if you could answer these questions to give a clearer picture of your vision and its value to the DAO.
2 Likes