RE: HIVE CrossDEX Proposal

Hey @borislavzlatanov, @vaultec6615, and @stoodkev723,

We appreciate you expressing your ideas and concerns. Seeing the community taking such an interest in our proposal is great. Here are our thoughts

Commitment to Decentralisation: Decentralisation is at the core of our mission. We're all about fostering collective efforts and contributions from the community. Your concerns about the centralised nature of the project are valid and something we take seriously.
Transition to TeraBlock DAO: We're transitioning to a DAO (Decentralized Autonomous Organization) by Q4 of next year. This move is a significant step towards ensuring our operations are more community-driven and transparent.
Collaboration with ICP and Partisia Blockchains: We are currently collaborating with ICP (Internet Computer Protocol) and Partisia Blockchains. These partnerships ensure that our entire ecosystem, including the HIVE CrossDEX, operates on-chain, enhancing transparency and security.
Open-Source Transition Plan: We understand the importance of open-source projects in the DeFi space. We plan to launch the HIVE CrossDEX as a closed-source system initially. This approach allows us to ensure stability and security from the outset. However, within a year, we intend to transition to an open-source model as we move towards a DAO structure as a company. This transition will allow for community auditing, contributions, and a greater sense of ownership among HIVE users.
Long-Term Benefits for the Chain: Our goal is to create lasting value for the HIVE chain. We can manage the early stages by initially launching as a closed source. However, transitioning to open-source ensures the community can maintain and develop the project even if our company changes course.

We're committed to making this a collaborative and community-driven project. Your feedback is crucial in shaping how we move forward, and we're open to further discussions and suggestions.

We look forward to more constructive conversations and building something great together.

Thank you for being open to taking in feedback, understanding the concerns and for the interest in collaboratively finding ways to make things work for both sides. Working with a truly decentralized network has its challenges, but I think groups that have decided to listen and adjust to address things have been extremely happy that they've done so. The community has criteria but it greatly rewards those willing to meet the criteria.

Hearing you will be transitioning to a DAO is awesome, kudos for that. Same with transitioning to open source.

From my perspective, anything the DHF pays for has to be delivered as open source. It has to be done with the purpose of supporting decentralization. Typically this includes enabling and supporting others in running nodes for the service, so that there are multiple parties doing it, and anyone can run a node. This gives us great security in both using the service and in its continuation. Since the community pays for it, there would also typically be no fees, or greatly reduced fees.

But there is a lot to be said for flexibility. There have been models where a group develops software, it begins to be used by the community (for a fee, etc.), and then the group makes a DHF proposal for making the software open source.

There can be other models as well.

Btw, I think you have a mistake in the other two people's usernames that you tagged.