Designated Secrettipbot Development Proposal

For the sake of the argument, one way to withdraw would be:

  1. Proposer announces that he wants to withdraw the current proposal so he could propose an updated one.
  2. Those who voted “Yes” change their vote to “No” so they could proceed and make an updated proposal.

IIRC this method was used in the past and there is no reason for not to use it now, if SG-1 wants of course. I already stated my opinion about it.


Mario first voted YES. After a little more consideration (esp. regarding the commission), the vote was changed to ABSTAIN. Given the updates I have seen, Mario’s vote will likely return to YES soon.

Regarding the meta discussion happening, I see no reason to penalize this team and this proposal for things either not formalized or not obviously available. I agree norms should be established (and obviously readily observable to those who might consider a proposal), and will take part in that process as appropriate.


No norms were ratified by the community. Anyone claiming that there are official norms are pushing norms dictated to the community vs agreed to by the community after the swap activated.

this is a vitally important point for delegators and stakeholders to understand when they make their own decision for how they want to vote. The system is working as designed.

1 Like

-(Community Pool Proposal) DataHub - Secret Network Integration
Oct 28

Submitted to on-chain vote 2020-11-17

-Secret Website Community Spend Proposal
Sep 23

Submitted to on-chain vote 2020-09-29

-(Community Pool Proposal) Keplr - Secret Network Integration
Aug 11

Submitted to on-chain vote 2020-08-24

This pattern alone shows that we have an agreed norm and convention.

That does not make it ratified by community, that just means large respected organizations leveraged their position to not participate unless rules the community didn’t explicitly agree to were followed.

There have been discussions about a constitution that would be ratified on chain, it sounds like something like this needs to be revisited to ensure community consent is gotten for any norms going forward.

As it stands it’s a fact to say no norms have been ratified by the default mechanism for ratifying social contracts on cosmossdk based chains. If posting to the forums is required then it must be agreed to via on chain governance otherwise the norm bypasses the DPOS nature of the system. Also a required field for submitting proposals that requires forum link is probably recommended.

I’ve stated the hard facts on this, so this will be my last comment on this topic.


Okay I switched my vote to yes, but I’d like for the tipbot to have snip20 support.


I support this proposal and think that the potential impact of this tool for SCRT and the community is substantial.

I also echo @moonstash and @mohammedpatla’s points above.


After reading all replies personally I share @Avret 's concerns about the actual dev effort involved when they already have a cosmos tipbot running.

I recognize it has some utility, but I think you’re just trying to grab the chance to make a quick buck by doing ctrl replace string ”cosmos” for ”secret” on your code and probably not much more.

Which, really, its fine. My dev job ends up being like that many times. The problem is selling it as a brand new thing for secret.

Trying also to claim that someone that receives a tip in SCRT becomes a user is dubious at best. The statement reminds me of when Warren Buffet was gifted crypto by Justin Sun lol.

Also 5, 3, or 1 percent feels like double dipping regardless of the amount transacted. You’re already getting a significant chunk of change for arguably a small dev effort.

On the topic of the process of presenting proposals, I agree with Ian in that no formal rules were ever set so trying to pin that on them feels silly.

Personally I don’t support this proposal not because of the tip bot itself but rather how the whole thing has been presented. I do think SG-1 has a great validator service though and they’re overall good guys.

I think it’s better if we think of the value this proposal is creating for Secret Network and not how much dev hours it would take to complete.

I frankly don’t care if it’s already built.


I would agree in most circumstances. If there’s something I hate at my workplace is when the subject of man hours and time tracking comes up but given the way it was presented I felt the need to bring it up.

As previously mentioned, I think it’s a “cool to have” feature, but regardless of whether it passes or not I don’t see a particularly big impact. Ultimately I feel pretty indifferent to it.

1 Like

Ditto. It seems the concerns have largely been addressed and the norms will be communicated better and adhered to for all future proposals. This tipbot is a fun tool and passing this will only have a positive effect on the community.


The forums tell one story, then the on chain voting tells another story.

We attracted roughly 50 unique node runners to the dpos governed Secret Network chain. In my opinion these node runners are a diverse set, each capable of making their own decisions and a testimony to our level of decentralization. Of those 50, only 1 voted no and the rest either didn’t vote, voted abstain, or voted yes.

That one node runner that voted no gets 70% of its voting power from 1 delegator. And the bulk of the other voting power that said no is this one address.
secret1ql99k6yxg7yfxcuyen5jvd4c49fzdun0tnhrdd. Outside of those 2 votes, which are responsible for nearly 100% of the NO votes, look at where we are?

The bulk of individuals (and still of voting power) who voted has voted in favor.

The system is working exactly as it was meant to. Our community of stakers and voters is getting more resilient against influence, asserting more independent thinking, and in turn we are getting more engagement from them.

Do not be distracted by the noise, the on chain data tells an incredibly clear story, just look at the proposal, the votes, and make your own decision. :grin:


Which proposal will people look at?
I looked but could not see the proposal we are voting on in the network explorer.

Thats a good point. We’re thinking through some ideas on how to improve that but for now i will say, on puzzle it does show a link to this thread.

1 Like

That was some kind of recount :joy:


Thank you to everyone that participated in the voting process for proposal #26.

We @toschdev and @immasssi appreciate your valuable time, feedback and discussions around the topic.

Here a brief summary of the deliverables since there was a proposed change to the operational fee:

Within the next 3 weeks SG-1 Validator will deliver a quality tool @Secrettipbot to facilitate sending and receiving of SCRT tips on Twitter and Telegram.

  • Development of Secrettipbot (Twitter & Telegram)
  • Dedicated node (Maximum uptime)
  • Operational cost covered by a 3% fee and never higher (Lowered from 5%)
  • Branding + Promotional campaign to kickstart and expand adoption
  • Regular giveaways & guides

For questions please reach out to us directly!

:star: Official Web:
:star: Official Twitter:
:star: Official Telegram:


Can you please clarify your comments around when or if this project will be open sourced. As it stands i am under the impression you said it would ultimately /eventually be open source.

1 Like

Yes the @Secrettipbot will start off closed sourced and be open sourced at a later date. We do not currently have an exact date for when we plan to open it. The main reason for this is to prevent early copy versions of the app. The same applies to @Cosmostipbot @Iristipbot @Secrettipbot Making it forkable this early will hurt the competative edge of the product.


Is anyone even maintaining this bot? it’s been broken for days now.

It’s been broken for longer than a few days. The SG-1 team is aware and has applied fixes. They’re just waiting on the RPC endpoint now.