A Word On Transparency
The data, represented without bias
Isn’t it fascinating that when you build a protocol which is ready from day one, functions completely autonomously, whose only tax element goes to a publicly controlled treasury, whose liquidity is locked for 265 years, you still have to justify yourself and spend time writing a medium, even though the information is all there for anybody who would like to spend even a small amount of time researching for themselves, rather than being a sheep to random anon FUDers online. But nevertheless here we go.
The original CULT presale & token distribution
The key risk to presale purchasers were that preallocated Guardians would sell, as you can see, this risk was highlighted on the sale page. You can also see the big “Show Token Locks” button where you could see absolutely everything. Alongside the presale, we also had the public “open letter to Guardians” which was viewable in our Discord docs, announced on Discord and we also hosted an AMA alongside it.
We made people aware of the mechanics behind Guardian allocations and published the open letter in an Announcement at 29/01/2022 13:51 https://discord.com/channels/931866010447929364/935557422699921479/936981942547673138
“Good day. Thank you all for your trust. I hope you are all here as I am, to fast forward the revolution and overthrow Centralization. I am aware that a fully diluted value of 1.25M token launch will also attract those who are speculating, that is fine, it is only natural in this market. If you have not yet read my manifesto, please do, it is why I created this protocol and why we are creating a truly decentralised protocol from the time of launch. Ahead of the sale and to keep the spirit of transparency going. I wanted to publicise the letter written to some pre appointed guardians. All remaining supply which is not allocated will be burnt on the morning of the 31st January. You may wonder why we have pre appointed Guardians. Well these Guardians are well known champions of decentralization. I will not doxx them, but some of them may decide to be known. The reason we need some more high profile guardians is to make sure that when we launch with a few hundred holders, we don’t have bad actors putting proposals forward to send money to their own wallets. The most important part of all of this is the mission. To fast forward the collapse of the current financial & social system & bring forth a new chapter in our history. If pre appointing some Guardians seems hypocritical to decentralization, that is fine, I admit it isn’t perfect, but once the token has launched, and the contracts are renounced this protocol will function without any human interference whatsoever. A mantle arguably only bitcoin can currently boast. Please see this open letter. At present around 30 guardians have asked for the full information, with five already locked on Unicrypt. They have until Monday morning before their allocations are burnt. “
As you can see, by this point, before the token was even live, people had been told in the open letter that over 50% of the 50 tentative Guardians had responded (indicating 25+) as well as in the announcement, told 30+ had responded. It was also made very clear that Guardians would not be doxxed and that all locks are viewable on Unicrypt.
You can also see very clearly, our misgivings on preallocating to Guardians, but also the reasoning behind feeling it necessary to do so. Again all of this is stated from before the token even existed, in multiple locations. Alongside this in the manifesto itself it speaks on the decision and also developer tokens. Somewhat predictably saying:
“My main concern has been how to launch the token, people are fickle, naysayers say nay & we couldn’t do it perfectly even if we wanted to. I have spent money on getting Cult DAO up and running, I want it to be a success so should I market it? What should my involvement be?”
Here is the pie chart of where Unicrypt displays we stand now. So what are the current stats as per Unicrypt’s live dashboard? (as per 2nd January 18:00 UTC)
Of the 6,666,666,666,666 CULT:
Unlocked: -554,146,474,238 (what has been released from vesting)
This equals a sum of 6,647,574,578,904.00.
The reason behind this is that the missing 19,092,087,762 is the small fees charged when locking tokens on Unicrypt. For this reason the 19,092,087,762 should be added to the 47,574,578,906 under the fees section. This has been reflected in the data & pie below this present day one.
Now let us travel back in time to 01/01/2022…
Here is the same data, classified by the same Unicrypt definitions, as at the time we went live on Uniswap V2:
It is worth noting that the burn amount above does not take into account any burns that were not sent to a dead wallet directly (For example re-locking a vesting lock to a contract or dead wallet).
Of course, most of the above is self explanatory and people will understand the meanings behind presale, liquidity & fees, so below is more granular detail on what constituted what was locked, unlocked and burnt.
How was the locked amount distributed?
The key thing to note with Unicrypt in regards to their classification, and the way we are displaying data above so it is representative to the dashboard/ILO page, is that locked is defined as “refers to token locks with maturity at least 7 days after the presale begins.”
This means that even though all locks including Guardians were viewable at all times on the pie chart, the Guardian allocations except for 4 which were accidentally locked linearly, weren’t counted as locked in the donut data and were treated as, and came under unlocked.
So what does the 670,935,688,246 in this section constitute?
Teams Individual Allocations & Wallets (Dev 1–10)
To bring up every single token lock ever, including developers, Guardians and community simply paste CULT token address here: https://app.unicrypt.network/services/lock-tokens
How was the unlocked amount distributed?
*Locked: refers to token locks with maturity at least 7 days AFTER the presale. Guardian allocations vested completely on 1st Feb, excluding those accidentally locked linearly
Slush Fund: 0x0a3BfCEF34693d5ED45FCf6E3001076451b85fED
Leftover CULT after locks kept aside for other expenses or uses, where our core developers did not have appropriate knowledge. For example, the 10 Guardians of the Apocalypse NFTs and other complex design and website work.
*Unicrypt does not take into account any burns which are burnt by locking the tokens to themselves or any burns sent to the following burn wallet: 0xdead000000000000000042069420694206942069
Burnt & Other/Miscellaneous wallets for info purposes:
No sales or token allocations, only buybacks which will be covered later.
A personal note on Guardian allocations
Granted, there was significant confusion here. Originally I had thought that the only double allocations were the 4 linearly vested ones but there was unfortunately more.
This is on me and I am extremely grateful that most of our Guardians who did get double allocations did the right thing after we alerted them to the errors and helped the cause by either burning or sending to the treasury.
I am either a European or on the east coast of America as most of you will have realised by now. If you haven’t already read the manifesto, please do, but if you have, then you will know that you cannot fake authenticity, and the person writing those words was not in a good head space, coupled with the provable transactions being gone midnight (I was in continental Europe), alongside the stress of a token launch, I shouldn’t have really been making unchangeable smart contract locks in the early hours, but alas, I wasn’t thinking that at the time.
That’s right, I can also be smol brein Pleb sometimes.
The Actual Data without all the Unicrypt caveats and definitions
As much as people like to pretend data is law, in reality, data is law within the context provided. Unicrypts data doesn’t read all the burns, nor does it count all locks as locked, this doesn’t make it wrong, it just only makes it right within appropriate context.
For example all of these statements are factually correct:
1,635,003,855,978 was burned before CULT went live
100,000,000,000 was burned before CULT went live
12.62% went to the team
9.53% went to the team
8.34% went to the team
Well it does, and it doesn’t.
It is correct that 1,635,003,855,978 was burned before CULT went live. 100,000,000,000 of this was burned manually and the remainder was burned automatically when the presale did not sell out.
The sum of all INDIVIDUAL developer allocations comes to 555,949,021,579. This is 8.34% of max supply.
The sum of all developer allocations, including slush fund, comes to 635,142,599,100. This is 9.53% of max supply.
Other reports have attempted to skew this even further, by pretending that we could predict how much of the presale would sell and they display team data AFTER burns.
This makes the sum of all allocations including slush the same 635,142,599,100, but selectively displaying percentages based on post IDO circulating supply of 5,031,662,810,688, this of course is completely misrepresentative as it presumes the exact outcome of the sale was known before it happened.
We’re not actually from the future you know?
Any actual analytical researcher should know that an accurate data set needs a constant in order for it to be truly comparable and measurable. What is that constant? A max supply of 6,666,666,666,666.
So here is the real data for you taking everything into account.
*Burnt but locked dev allocation has been moved to burnt. L + UL shows where the allocation was originally counted in Unicrypts definition
Hope this is much easier to read and understand. Part 2 will soon follow where we will be spying on those pesky dev & slush wallet to see what sort of mischief they’ve been up to!
If they’ve been doing good deeds I’m going to SCREAM!