There’s no mention for other cosmos holders, i think thid is just one and only for nom stakers
I’ll vote yes, this is a great incentive for nom holders. I feel like basically doubling my 
1 Like
While not all roses in the shorter term, there are some advantages I can think of over the longer term duration for those with patients - Early adopters received hyper inflationary staking rewards for many months to bootstrap the network - it was crazy hit 120+% APR I think, which ofc compounded over and over if you restaked regularly ; )
also trying to market buy any large amount of NOM from an exchange will quickly raise the price as it is a very thin market - so someone now trying to accumulate a big bag on the open market is difficult and they will pay more than you think ( I know this as I have been trying to add some more NOM) and those buying in now never earnt the hyper inflationary rewards or will get that opportunity again……which means those good actors who are early will get more ONEX : )
1 Like
I completely agree with you 
2 Likes
As @Stanislav mentioned, NOM continues to exist! Early adopters of NOM got access to very significant staking rewards that others did not. The airdrop proposal in itself already inherently proportionately rewards early adopters more than it does new adopters.
1 Like
It actually does, as the longer you staked the more rewards you earned and thus the more tokens you receive. If the airdrop only matched your initial and does not account for staking rewards, then you would be right.
1 Like
We’re open to discussion on this topic! The proposed one-year vesting period aims to ensure that ONEX’s liquidity expands in tandem with its growing adoption. This includes an immediate unlock, followed by monthly releases. However, if you believe a 100% release on the first day is more advantageous, we encourage you to share your analysis with the community for their consideration.
Regarding the comment on “maneuvering,” Pendulum views this with a sense of humor. Isn’t it essential for a project to evolve and embrace new technologies? The ongoing technical advancements of ONEX and its various developments reflect a strong commitment from contributors to maintain its competitive edge and uphold the best technical standards. Rest assured, all features and functionalities previously outlined in our documentation remain unchanged, including NOM’s utility. This includes the continued application of the buy and burn mechanism to NOM.
It’s important to note that all network and application upgrades, as well as new features, are subject to voting by the DAO and implemented by a diverse group of contributors. We welcome differing viewpoints and encourage active participation. If there are aspects you disagree with, we invite you to submit pull requests and engage in the design process. This invitation is extended with the utmost respect and affection, recognizing your role as a valuable member of Onomy’s community who, like all DAO members, seeks the best outcomes for the project.
2 Likes
Your proposal certainly raises an intriguing point. Our initial intention was to ensure a fair distribution of ONEX tokens exclusively to existing NOM holders. However, the idea of extending the airdrop to include others who haven’t previously been involved with the project merits consideration as it could be an effective strategy to expand our community.
Nevertheless, we should perhaps consider broadening our focus beyond just ONEX. What about embracing the wider Onomy ecosystem? For instance, the DAO could potentially offer a NOM airdrop to ATOM holders. This approach might be a more inclusive way to attract new participants and stakeholders.
I’d be keen to hear your thoughts on this and potentially open a new discussion topic if you desire. @Oscar also seemed to have similar thoughts.
2 Likes
IBC, as a relaying technology for interconnecting IBC-enabled chains, remains relevant in this context. However, it’s important to note that this proposal primarily addresses the governance aspect of NOM, which is a distinct matter. Beyond governance, any chain that establishes an IBC pathway can freely transfer assets to ONEX, enabling the listing of new pairs or the provision of liquidity.
Furthermore, the establishment of new IBC paths with bridge hubs like Axelar or Wormhole is a viable option. These hubs can facilitate the movement of assets across various chains, including those within the Solana and EVM ecosystems. Additionally, the use of Arc, built upon Gravity Bridge, is another potential avenue.
Looking ahead, there may come a time when a standardized bridge partner emerges to dominate the space. Yet, the possibility of IBC evolving to interconnect the entire blockchain ecosystem — including major players like Ethereum and Solana — cannot be ruled out. Although IBC is a native Cosmos technology, which might suggest a bias for Pendulum’s choice, other DAO members might have a preference for the aforementioned bridge partners.
Ultimately, market dynamics and liquidity will be the deciding factors, dictating where users gravitate — whether it’s towards IBC, Axelar, Wormhole, Arc, or other platforms.
2 Likes
Replying to Oscar. No, the proposed “airdrop” is limited to those that have delegated / staked NOM on the Onomy Network.
When it comes to bridging and liquidity CCTP looks very promising going forward although centralized stable coins that can blacklist and cancel wallet addresses of users and controlled by centralized forces are not an optimal solution but given the need for regulatory compliance to move forward it may be a UX compromise the market accepts along with non custodial and more ‘decentralized’ stable coin solutions as they mature and gather more “trust’ with crypto natives who understand the benefits
https://x.com/circle/status/1729500586452943043?s=46&t=B8Xi1i4mjU-3jAtisLexUw
I do believe instead of 1yr vesting, we should be doing 100% vesting on day 1; those who want to dump; will dump either way. Best to let them out of the gates as we build out ONEX.
1 Like
will $atom stakers or those staking other tokens within the cosmos ecosystem be eligible during any time of the vesting period? because as other have said, us $nom holders from a long time ago should be at least prioritized. my thoughts. either way, i am voting yes
my vote yes , good condition
1 Like
Fair point but I would add that sentiment does change significantly over the course of months especially IF prices are going in the positive direction. But weak hands will always be weak hands and need to be shaken out in the end : )
2 Likes
Well, the solution found seems very appropriate, regardless of the fact that those of us who still have tokens pending that we bought almost two years ago do not have time to stake them all…
It is also true that if people buy $NOM now and stake it, they will benefit just as much as those of us who have always staked our NOM…
But hey, the team, I suppose, will have thought about the best option for the project.
1 Like
The following sentence “The total supply of $ONEX will reflect the consolidated NOM in the snapshot, which currently stands at ~65 million.” Are you referring to that this would be the total supply of ONEX? I mean, wouldn’t more coins be created and it would be a finite supply?
Maybe you could think of those who want to unlock the ONEX delivered by Airdrop on the first day, burning a piece. That is, if you are not willing to wait the corresponding months, you can obtain a % of the corresponding Airdrop, burning the remaining
My vote is YES. We should get this going asap. I think is a great idea for the onomy chain, a 2nd token stabilises things. I just hope you’ll launch the exchange with it too.
Now, the 12 month per month unlocking period i think is pretty good idea.
Hi Marcos, the supply figure is referencing the genesis supply. From there, staking reward inflation will begin. I hope this answers your question!