Even if you did the migration using the web wallet and not Keplr, your funds are tied to your seed phrase, not the wallet interface. Both coin types 750 and 118 are supported on Persistence Wallet, so nothing is lost.

You can import the same mnemonic or keystore into a wallet that supports coin type 118, such as Keplr or the Persistence web wallet, and your balance should appear.

Guide: Persistence Wallet | Persistence Docs

Web wallet: https://wallet.persistence.one

Hope this helps. Let us know if you have any more questions!

Then again I am not an accountant or economist, just my point of view.

Hey XPRT community, let’s talk about a serious opportunity that’s sitting right on our doorstep. We’ve built something incredible with Persistence a network designed for liquid staking and decentralized finance. But to be honest, we’re only scratching the surface of what our collective capital can do.

The game-changer? Getting the $XPRT token whitelisted on the Terra Liquidity Alliance (TLA) and leveraging protocols like Eris Protocol. This isn’t just about adding another farm it’s about fundamentally upgrading our community’s capital efficiency. We can position XPRT as a cornerstone of cross-chain DeFi, and in the process, create a powerful, self-reinforcing cycle of growth for everyone involved.

Let’s break down exactly how this works and why it’s such a big deal.

The Core Strategy: The High-Leverage Yield Loop

The basic idea is simple, but the execution is where the magic happens. We’re going to borrow cheaply from one ecosystem and deploy that capital into a high-yield opportunity on another. It’s about being smart with our money, not just bullish on our assets.

Here’s the step-by-step playbook:

Step 1: Source Low-Cost Capital (<10% Borrowing)

This is the foundation. The beauty of the current DeFi landscape is the fierce competition among lending protocols. We aren’t limited to a single chain. Our strategy leverages this.

• Option A: The Composable Approach. Use our own Persistence chain and its connections. Deposit high-quality, liquid-staked assets like $stkATOM or $XPRT itself on Comdex or other dApps as collateral. Because these are valuable, productive assets, we can often secure borrow rates in the single digits.
• Option B: Cross-Chain Arbitrage. This is where it gets interesting. We can use Inter-Blockchain Communication (IBC) or bridges to tap into lending markets on other chains. Think about protocols on Kava, EVMOS, or even Ethereum L2s. Each has periods of excess liquidity where borrowing rates plummet. Our job is to find that cheap capital.
• The Bottom Line: By being chain-agnostic in our borrowing, we’re not begging for a good rate; we’re actively hunting for it across a dozen different markets. A sub-10% borrow rate is not just possible it’s a realistic target for a community as savvy as ours.

Step 2: Deploy for High-Yield Returns (~200% APR)

Once we have that low-cost capital, we direct it to the most productive farm available. Right now, that’s the Terra ecosystem, specifically through the Terra Liquidity Alliance (TLA) ErisProtocol.

So, what’s the deal with these 200% APRs? It’s not magic; it’s incentivization.

• Terra Liquidity Alliance (TLA): This is a coalition, almost a “liquidity union,” designed to bootstrap deep liquidity for the new Terra (LUNA 2.0) ecosystem. They provide massive incentives in the form of native token rewards to anyone who provides liquidity for whitelisted assets.
• Eris Protocol: They’re a key player, specializing in liquid staking and Amplified Liquidity Pools (ALPs). These ALPs are like super-charged liquidity pools that leverage the TLA incentives, creating those eye-popping yields we see.

Our deployment is straightforward: we take our borrowed stablecoins pair them with another TLA-whitelisted asset, and provide liquidity to an ALP on Eris Protocol. The combination of trading fees, protocol incentives, and TLA rewards is what drives that APR toward 200%.

Step 3: The Arbitrage Profit Engine

This is the beautiful part. The math is brutally simple.

• You Pay: <10% in borrowing costs.
• You Earn: ~200% in yield.
• Your Net Profit: >190% APY, effectively.

That’s not just yield farming; that’s a strategic capital arbitrage. We’re acting like a decentralized hedge fund, but for the benefit of every single community member who participates. The real leverage here isn’t from a protocol it’s from our collective intelligence and cross-chain agility.

The Compelling Case for an XPRT Whitelist on TLA

Okay, so the strategy for us is clear. But why should the Terra Liquidity Alliance care? Why should they whitelist $XPRT? We need to make a compelling case, and honestly, it’s a win-win.

1. We Bring a New, High-Quality, and Aligned Community.
The TLA wants liquidity, sure, but what it really needs is diverse and sustainable liquidity. The Persistence community isn’t a bunch of mercenary capital we’re builders and long-term stakers. We understand Proof-of-Stake, liquid staking, and the value of economic security. By welcoming XPRT, the TLA isn’t just getting a token they’re onboarding an entire ecosystem of sophisticated DeFi participants who are invested in the success of interoperable chains. That’s a huge value add.

2. XPRT is an Institutional-Grade Asset.
Let’s be real, not all tokens are created equal. $XPRT is the backbone of a network that’s pioneering real-world assets and institutional DeFi. It’s a serious asset with a clear utility beyond speculation. Adding XPRT to the TLA whitelist elevates the entire alliance’s credibility. It signals that TLA is curating a portfolio of blue-chip, interoperable assets, which in turn attracts more serious capital from other ecosystems.

3. We Create a Powerful Cross-Chain Feedback Loop.
This is the strategic masterstroke. Whitelisting XPRT creates a symbiotic relationship between Persistence and Terra.

• For Persistence: It provides our holders with a premier yield-generating outlet, increasing the utility and attractiveness of holding $XPRT. A more useful token is a stronger token.
• For Terra: It funnels a fresh stream of capital and users from the Persistence ecosystem directly into the TLA. This deepens their liquidity, strengthens their TVL, and demonstrates the power of their alliance to attract external communities.

We’re not coming to take we’re coming to participate and strengthen. We become a bridge, channeling capital and users from the Cosmos ecosystem and beyond into Terra’s vibrant DeFi scene.

The Call to Action: Let’s Build This Together

So, where do we go from here? This isn’t just a theory; it’s an actionable plan.

1. Community Discussion: Let’s get this conversation going in our forums and governance chats. We need to build a consensus that this is the right strategic move.
2. Draft a Formal Proposal: We should draft a clear, professional proposal to the Terra Liquidity Alliance Erisprotocol. This proposal should outline everything we just discussed the mutual benefits, the quality of the XPRT asset, and the commitment of our community to actively participate.
3. Forge the Alliance: We need to open direct lines of communication with the TLA Eris Protocol teams. Let’s present our case, not as petitioners, but as partners offering a strategic expansion of their ecosystem.

The bottom line is this: DeFi is evolving from isolated chains to a connected economy of specialized networks. The communities that thrive will be the ones that are most agile, that can move capital efficiently across these chains to find the best opportunities.

By securing an XPRT whitelist on the Terra Liquidity Alliance, we’re not just chasing a high APR. We’re making a strategic declaration that the Persistence community is a leading force in the new, interconnected DeFi landscape. We’re putting our capital to work in the smartest way possible, and in doing so, we’re building a stronger, more valuable future for $XPRT and every single person who holds it.

Let’s get to work.

Wow, what a relief. THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!

Wow, what a relief.

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!

This is the latest error I am getting, regardless of gas levels:

“Broadcasting transaction failed with code 4 (codespace: sdk). Log: signature verification failed; please verify account number (36438), sequence (25) and chain-id (core-1): unauthorized”

Am attempting to redeem rewards, which seems to be the only way to convert the ixpert back into xprt… thank you

Nobody wants to assist on Telegram. Please help me.

My hash: 0x0D5Cd7F5E776b75903871FA3E1BFb093aB20e928

To give you some context: the last community spend proposal went live on February 23, 2025, and incentives started flowing from March 1, 2025. At that point, the XPRT liquidity on Persistence DEX was 5,205,788.51 XPRT. As of August 20, 2025 (yesterday), that number has grown to 6,608,632.35 XPRT.

Sharing a quick graph here to make it easier to visualize

With that I am curious how much of the growth in TVL is based on value increases of the assets vs real growth in the amount of assets on the platform. Is that something you have as well?

I’m supportive of the 1,000,000 XPRT allocation with monthly reviews. The flexible split between DEX liquidity and BTC interop makes sense. With that being said, I think KPIs (TVL growth, daily active swappers, cross-chain volume) should be clearly defined so the community can evaluate ROI.

2. Liquidity & BTC Interop Growth Ideas

•Run short-term boosted campaigns (e.g., 2–3 week reward multipliers) to re-ignite liquidity and attract new users.

•Incentivize BTC LPs who also provide liquidity in other ecosystem pairs (ATOM, USDC, OSMO) to deepen stickiness.

•Improve UX (bridging flow, wallet integration, gas predictability) incentives + good UX = sustainable growth.

•Use a portion of incentives for education/marketing so users understand the unique value of BTC swaps on Persistence.

3. Other Considerations

•Monthly multisig reports on deployed funds + KPIs would help build transparency.

•Share lessons learned from the previous 86,500 XPRT incentives to avoid repeating inefficiencies.

•Long-term: consider transitioning from heavy community pool reliance toward protocol revenue recycling into incentives.

Summary: Supportive of the proposal, provided it’s paired with transparency, KPIs, and UX/education efforts.

I’m available ambassador spots to help spread the Gospel of persistence should incase ambassadorship spot is open in the near future, feel free to reach out.

We’re proposing to allocate 1,000,000 XPRT from the community pool to fund incentives over the next ~6 months from the community pool.

This budget will be flexibly deployed across two key priorities:

• Maintaining strong liquidity for XPRT on Persistence DEX.
• Driving traction for BTC interoperability through targeted incentive campaigns

Introduction

Liquidity and adoption are the lifeblood of the Persistence ecosystem. Over the past year, incentives have helped:

• Deepen liquidity across major XPRT trading pairs

• Sustain healthy trading volumes despite market swings

• Onboard new users into our ecosystem

With BTC interoperability now live on mainnet (beta version), we now have a unique opportunity to combine our incentive programs into one flexible budget, ensuring we can both keep liquidity strong on the DEX and accelerate adoption for our new cross-chain capabilities.

Background: DEX Liquidity Incentives

Previously incentivised pools on Persistence DEX:
PSTAKE/XPRT, USDC/USDT, ATOM/XPRT, USDT/XPRT, stkXPRT/XPRT, XPRT/WBTC, BABY/XPRT, BABY/WBTC, WBTC/USDC

These incentives have contributed to sustained volumes and liquidity depth across multiple pools, which benefits all ecosystem participants.

The last community pool spend proposal for incentives (Proposal #128) was passed on February 18th, 2025. Since then, incentives have been deployed monthly, with allocations reviewed and adjusted based on traction, market conditions, and community sentiment.

Below is the list of subsequent monthly proposals:

On avg 159,897.8571 XPRT were spent in the last 7 months for XPRT incentives on pools listed above.

Key metrics for Persistence DEX:

Cumulative DEX Volume on Persistence DEX clocked to $37.71M

TVL decreased in line with the broader market, but average pool yields stayed strong enough to maintain healthy TVL levels and support trading activity.

Background: Interop Incentives

With the launch of Persistence DEX V2 and BTC interoperability, we have the chance to position ourselves as a leading venue to swap variants of BTC between Layer 2s.

Our earlier closed-beta campaigns (with 50,000XPRT in incentives) brought in thousands of participants and built strong awareness. Across the testnet phases, we saw over 750,000 impressions on socials, 17,977 unique users, and 417,979 orders placed. Each mainnet swap was capped at $20, and whitelisted access for testnet participants carried over to mainnet, where we recorded $5,600 (~0.0497 BTC) in filled order volume and around 200 users who are now eligible to claim rewards for their active participation since day one.

The next step is a public open phase to:

• Drive active trading and boost integrations

• Onboard new users to get to know the product

• Test and improve UX before full release and deployment on more chains

• Engage both existing stakers and newcomers through gamified tasks, streak challenges, and referral programs

The Proposal

We request the allocation of 1,000,000 XPRT from the community pool.
These tokens will be:

• Split dynamically between DEX liquidity incentives and BTC interop incentives
• Deployed over ~6 months, with monthly reviews to adjust distribution based on results
• Managed from a designated multisig for transparency and operational security

Current remaining funds from earlier DEX incentives (to be merged with this budget):
86,518.926992 XPRT — View on Mintscan

Multisig Address (⅔): persistence1fn5td7lw575xwhuyjtvearzc8p546mj6agaw0c

Why a Combined Allocation?

• Flexibility: Move incentives where they’re most effective at any given time
• Efficiency: Reduce overhead from running separate funding proposals

Community Feedback

We’re seeking input on:

1. Do you agree with the proposed XPRT allocation? If not, what alternative amount would you recommend?
2. Do you have any other ideas for maintaining or increasing DEX liquidity and BTC Cross-Chain Swap users?
3. Are there any other points or considerations you’d like to raise regarding this proposal?

We highly value the perspectives of our community, and this discussion aims to help us better understand the priorities and needs of the Persistence ecosystem. Your thoughts and feedback are essential. Please share them and join the conversation.

We look forward to hearing your insights and ideas!

LeonoorsCryptoman:

What I see in web3 is always the struggle between projects trying to run a business and the transparent nature we expect from this market. Whereas literally nobody asks large companies what their plans and timelines are is expected in web3 were all plannings and roadmaps should be out in the open

That analogy doesn’t quite hold. Public companies—especially in regulated markets—are held to strict standards of reporting, forecasting, earnings calls, and shareholder disclosures. Roadmaps, financials, and executive visibility aren’t optional—they’re expected. So yes, people do ask, and they have legal grounds to demand it.

If a web3 project that has launched a coin and is publicly traded should to be treated like a business, that comes with responsibilities—transparency being a big one.

Any updates on this? It’s a promising idea but there’s been no follow-up.

Thanks—I did some digging. According to persistence.one, the CEO is Tushar Aggarwal (X profile), but he hasn’t mentioned the project or any developments in about a year. Has there been a leadership transition, or has he stepped back from day-to-day ops?

The team size is noted as 16+. Any transparency on what roles they’re focused on (dev, ops, BD, etc.)? Some insight here would help understand where things are headed—especially when validators and stakers are covering real costs.

Also for the migration, we will be extending the deadline. So you can continue to use the same 750 coin-type address

-I created my Persistence wallet several years ago. I created a password that contains a blank character. Later when I tried to login again and to this day, wallet.persistence.one says: ‘spaces not allowed’.
-I cannot use my seed phrase to recover my wallet, because that option has been removed from wallet.persistence.one
-I tried to import the wallet using Keplr wallet app, using the recovery phrase, but Keplr doesn’t recognise it (invalid recovery phrase).

It’s crazy to me that all 3 options fail because this should be simple and easy, but I need to get into my wallet to do the migration which ends tomorrow. What can I do/is there a way to contact the Persistence team so they at least can simply allow blank characters again for the password entry on wallet.persistence.one

Step 1: Rewards Claimed The PCOL multisig successfully claimed accumulated rewards from our LP positions:

• PSTAKE: 46,713.887159772077775311
• stkXPRT: 17,855.300456
• XPRT: 18,373.130930

Multisig Transaction: https://cw3multisig.persistence.one/persistence1axw5he6ktvz8rgacec3ldxmegy0urn0xevsysl7e0hx6dx90er6qlcv78s/12

Step 2: stkXPRT Conversion to XPRT To optimize for the XPRT/PSTAKE pool, we converted all stkXPRT:

• Converted: 17,855.300456 stkXPRT → 20,054.216 XPRT
• Conversion Txn 1: https://www.mintscan.io/persistence/tx/87648EBBF5983E99B2E6A75B34B9E843504704988488394BC79C20921F8D100C?height=22579526
• Conversion Txn 2: https://www.mintscan.io/persistence/tx/4BB023EC445514C2E4117B0B2A11F73C04FDF929747C8C3B1F26D899C14C7B30?height=22579529

Step 3: Liquidity Addition to XPRT/PSTAKE Pool Final Holdings Post-Conversion:

• PSTAKE: 46,713.887159772077775311
• XPRT: 38,443.018546 (combined from original + converted)

Pool Addition:

• Added liquidity to XPRT/PSTAKE pool matching the current pool ratio (~52:48)
• Add Liquidity Txn: https://www.mintscan.io/persistence/tx/A6C51CC7AB0BC5DA51E7D3318191A7E6EA3E085E268EA322B99BD3FDB03CCF0B

Remaining Balance: 3,200.501546 XPRT (returned to multisig due to pool ratio constraints)

• Return Txn: https://www.mintscan.io/persistence/tx/7988976B101E5033DD70CD3C2ABEE529EB79E73A9C8FF8DA154242EACBD7EB2C

Step 4: LP Token Management & Bonding

• LP tokens successfully transferred back to PCOL multisig
• Bonding Transaction: https://cw3multisig.persistence.one/persistence1axw5he6ktvz8rgacec3ldxmegy0urn0xevsysl7e0hx6dx90er6qlcv78s/14 to bond LP tokens and begin earning rewards

This reinvestment operation has successfully:

• Claimed all accumulated PCOL rewards
• Optimized token composition for target pool
• Added substantial liquidity to the high-volume XPRT/PSTAKE pool
• Activated reward earning through bonding
• Maintained operational efficiency with minimal unused funds

The rewards-backed flywheel is now actively compounding, with our community-owned liquidity earning both trading fees and incentives in one of Persistence DEX’s most vital trading pairs.

Thank you to the community for the support and alignment on this strategic reinvestment. The PCOL initiative continues to strengthen the Persistence ecosystem’s liquidity foundation sustainably and effectively.

Cosmick777:

I do have some questions though, does the community pool receive rewards from the XPRT/PSTAKE pool as an incentive for adding liquidity? or does it not receive rewards being the community pool?

Yes absolutely it does, since the liquidity is also bonded it earns both trading fees and incentives.

This approach is both straightforward and efficient, leveraging the fact that all reward tokens are already compatible with the target pool. By recycling rewards directly back into liquidity, we reinforce the compounding flywheel effect that drives deeper pools and increased trading volume—perfectly aligning with the original intent behind PCOL.

Focusing on the XPRT/PSTAKE pool also strengthens one of the DEX’s most active and vital trading pairs, ensuring robust liquidity and a better trading experience for all users. The operational plan is clear, actionable, and minimizes unnecessary swaps or conversions.

In summary, this strategy maximizes impact, supports the ecosystem, and keeps the process streamlined for the community. I fully support moving forward with this plan.

Just wondering if the community pool is receiving rewards for adding liquidity

This proposal seeks community consensus to claim the accrued rewards from the PCOL wallet—approximately $4,296—and reinvest them into the XPRT/PSTAKE liquidity pool on Persistence DEX. This action aligns with the long-term vision of sustainable community-owned liquidity, as laid out in previous PCOL and governance proposals.

Background

Over the past few months, the Persistence community has taken meaningful steps to bootstrap liquidity on the rebranded Persistence DEX (formerly Dexter) through Persistence Community-Owned Liquidity (PCOL) initiatives:

• PCOL Initial Proposal – Aug 2023 outlined the purpose of establishing sustainable liquidity using community treasury assets, initially targeting pools such as XPRT/USDT, XPRT/PSTAKE, and XPRT/stkXPRT.

• PCOL Deployment & Expansion – Oct 2023 showed strong community alignment in expanding to stablecoin liquidity and emphasized that rewards would be recycled back into LP positions to maintain liquidity depth over time.

• Governance & Growth Strategy – Nov 2023 reinforced the importance of aligning DEX growth with governance oversight and emphasized the compounding effect of liquidity incentives through community-owned assets.

Current PCOL Rewards Snapshot

As of now, the PCOL wallet has earned ~$4,296 in LP rewards, spread across three tokens:

These rewards stem from LP positions that the community previously authorized and have now matured to the point where reinvestment can compound their impact.

Why Reinvest in XPRT/PSTAKE?

We propose to claim the rewards and LP the entire amount into the XPRT/PSTAKE pool on Persistence DEX for the following reasons:

1. Simplicity & Efficiency:
   All three reward tokens are already in or directly swappable into the target assets for this pool, allowing for seamless execution without having to sell any of the tokens. They’re also pretty much 50/50 at this stage so that works out nicely.

2. Rewards-Backed Flywheel:
   As outlined in earlier proposals, the intent behind PCOL was to recycle rewards back into liquidity, creating a compounding flywheel of deeper pools and increased swap volume.

3. Supports One of the DEX’s Key Pools:
   The XPRT/PSTAKE pool consistently ranks among the most active by volume on Persistence DEX. Concentrating rewards here reinforces an already important trading pair and helps maintain a strong user experience on the platform.

Operational Plan

Upon community consensus, the multisig will:

1. Claim the current PCOL rewards.

2. Convert stkXPRT into XPRT via the stkXPRT/XPRT pool.

3. Pair the max amount possible of XPRT/PSTAKE pool based on current pool ratio (should be close to 100% of the rewards).

Community Discussion

We invite the community to share feedback and confirm alignment on this reinvestment approach.
Do you support recycling these rewards back into the XPRT/PSTAKE pool?

Options:

• Yes – Claim and reinvest all into XPRT/PSTAKE

• No – Hold rewards or allocate differently (please comment)

Let’s keep growing community liquidity—together, sustainably.

What I see in web3 is always the struggle between projects trying to run a business and the transparent nature we expect from this market. Whereas literally nobody asks large companies what their plans and timelines are is expected in web3 were all plannings and roadmaps should be out in the open.

I recognize that @dneorej is present a lot on various channels, promoting the project and sharing the vision. I don’t have insight in effectivity of the chosen channels, something that might be useful to track as well. Is the userbase growing? Are more adresses being activated on chain? Key metrics to track whether we have more people coming in the ecosystem than leaving.

Productwise I agree. I am glad that the team focusses on the product, since that is literally the only way out. Fiddling with small pocket change like inflation is only delaying the fact that in the end you need usage, volume to really make a project successful.

Something which is not entirely clear for me yet is that value accrual which occurs through the products put on the market. How is that flowing back to XPRT as an asset? In other words, why should people buy the asset and stake it?

This means continuously building out our products + doing marketing + doing BD + doing Research + experimenting. One example I’ll give is that we’re looking into how we can give fee discounts to XPRT stakers.

All of this info is publicly available. Ever since we started, we’ve met most validators either in person at conferences or over a call and have kept in touch. We’ve encouraged all validators to have a line of communication with us since day one, which is also written on our docs: Validator Communication | Persistence One. We’d encourage you to do the same and reach out to us to have a conversation and see how we can help. And, of course, this offer extends to anyone in the validator community.

BTCFi is a broader term for what I call Bitcoin Powered Decentralised Finance. I’ve touched upon this in the many spaces, interviews and podcasts I’ve attended over the last few months. It’s DeFi on top of the bitcoin network and around bitcoin the asset. The idea is that the target user base is so much bigger than DeFi on Ethereum, since the bitcoin ecosystem is just so much bigger.

Babylon is the Cosmos’ gateway to Bitcoin. Rather than fighting that and trying to make Persistence that gateway to bitcoin, we leverage what Babylon has to access the Bitcoin ecosystem, meanwhile we contribute to their ecosystem by bringing an alternative DEX and soon a connection to other BTC L2s. With the huge variation in bitcoin related assets on Babylon (Mintscan), the use case for our Cross-Chain swap product couldn’t be clearer. Whatever we build for Babylon is reproducible on Persistence and vice versa. The more users and volumes we can generate across the different products, the better our chances for the entire Persistence ecosystem to benefit.

We used to have a very extensive FDP and all details for the various rounds have always been published transparently on this page: https://docs.persistence.one/community-and-support/foundation-delegations
However, running this program took a lot of effort and time and the engagement had started to decrease over time, and we started to take a more passive approach towards this. This means we do spot checks now and then to ensure the main criteria are met and rebalances where it seems appropriate. I’m happy to start reviving a more active program here if there’s demand for that.

We’re considering all options to support validators and are open to any suggestions. Besides the FDP review mentioned above, we can also look at the reduction of the validator set or an increase in the minimum commission as mentioned earlier in this thread. On another note, it’s also open for anyone to submit this as a governance proposal on chain… Regardless of these, I still believe the best way to help validators is to make the products a success, get more users and protocol revenues to make the ecosystem self-sustainable.

see above

The strategy has been communicated and we continue to talk about it on all our socials. We are focused on growing 2 things: the DEX (on Persistence and Babylon), and the Cross-chain swaps product for BTC L2s. The strategy is to integrate all of these nicely into 1 single product catering to the swapping needs of the BTCFi, Babylon & Persistence Ecosystem. BTC.X to BTC.Y across all BTCFi chains is the vision. Time is needed to execute the strategy and make the vision reality.

I hope this answers your questions and if not, I’d suggest again you reach out to us to set up a common telegram group and a call to get to know each other. We’re here to do our best and support where we can.

And where’s the leadership accountability?

• Who’s actually running this project?
• Who’s the CEO?
• What is your role as the COO, if you are not answering all questions or take responsibility?

Also, let’s be real — several direct questions were completely skipped:

1. What differentiates BTCFi from existing protocols? Why would users choose it?
2. How does the new Babylon DEX benefit XPRT or the Persistence chain at all?
3. What are the FDP delegation criteria? Who decides where are the decisions and results posted transparently?
4. Are there plans to help validators with growing infra costs?
5. Who’s on the team now and head count?
6. We’re supposed to wait until end of 2025 ? For what, exactly? What’s going to change? What’s the actual plan? Just asking for more time isn’t a strategy.

None of this got answered. Just generic fluff.
If the CEO office isn’t responsible for performance, sustainability, or transparency — then who is?
These aren’t nitpicks. These are foundational concerns for anyone staking time, money, or reputation on this network. If leadership can’t be transparent or take ownership, then then leadership is unfit for the purpose.

This allows you not to stack coins and increases the validator’s earnings.

The interest rates there are not bad now =))))

In my opinion, none of the “easy” ideas would make any difference – at best they would increase the number of tokens we earn from validating and therefore the sell pressure if we decide to swap them for fiat.

Revisiting the situation at the end of the year sounds like a good plan. A few more months won’t make much difference in terms of costs for us all, and it leaves you hopefully enough time to complete the ongoing project.

Giving utility to XPRT is definitely the best way forward. Then we can optimize things by reworking the tokenomics and validator parameters, but it’s secondary.

I appreciate @amelia for putting forward such a detailed, data-driven case. The thread has clearly struck a chord with many in the validator set who are, in truth, keeping this chain running — sometimes out of principle, sometimes out of long-standing relationships, and often without the recognition or support they deserve.

Let me try to structure my thoughts in a few different buckets:

On Sustainability and Structure

There’s a shared sense that the network’s design no longer aligns with its scale. From suggestions like reducing the active validator set, to revisiting the inflation model and base commission floor, many of the ideas raised are not unreasonable. In fact, several could be executed with relatively low dev overhead via governance:

• Validator set reduction: While never a popular choice, it’s a governance-controlled parameter that could better align rewards with reality. In the current situation, it might make more sense to have a way smaller set of validators.
• Increased minimum commission: This is supported natively by the SDK and could help increase validator returns. The only risk with a number that is too high here is that more stakers unstake as their returns reduce.
• Adjusting inflation: This could increase validator returns, however given the many other discussions we’ve had on this forum around inflation, maybe not the best route at the moment.

The idea of building a soft reputation-weighted delegation system is promising, but admittedly more complex and time-consuming to implement as well. While I’m open to the community piloting ideas or off-chain experiments that could inform such a direction, I’d prefer the core team to keep their focus on the products that can bring real utility for the ecosystem: the DEX and the Interoperability product.

Side note: no hard feelings: While we are doing everything we can to bring more utility to the products and to XPRT, we unfortunately cannot give any guarantees on validator revenue. In the end everything in this ecosystem is an open market and everyone can join or leave as they please, based on their level of long-term believe in the project. Of course I want to keep all validators on board and keep everyone happy, but there are no hard feelings whatsoever if anyone decides to leave based on the current conditions. We love you for all the contributions along the way and we’ll welcome you back with open arms when it makes more sense.

On Bigger Questions

Some of the heavier proposals — like forking the chain, merging with others, or even sunsetting — are uncomfortable to read but I understand why they’re being raised. The reality is that other Cosmos chains have made these hard decisions rather than prolong validator pain. That’s not the direction I want to see for Persistence because we are still building towards a vision, which might not have been the case for these other chains.

I don’t see sunsetting as the plan. I do still see a chance to increase utility with the 2 main products, further align incentives, and make sure that those contributing to the chain aren’t punished for doing so, on the contrary. I’d say we need at least until the end of 2025 to really make that case clear and give it a real shot at success.

Continued discussion

I hope these answers shed some light on my thinking around the raised concerns and I hope they spark a new wave of discussion amongst validators which could (or not) result in an on-chain proposal with some (quick?) wins.

We may not be able to implement every idea right away — but I do believe we can move forward on several fronts without distracting from core development. Once both the DEX on Babylon and the interop product are fully live and started to gain some traction, we can revisit these things as by then things could look completely different.

Thanks again all of you for being the backbone of this chain.

Thanks for bringing such a detailed conversation to live, some of these ideas and points are very valid and should definitely be looked into or discussed further. Please allow me some time to reply to each of your points in more detail, aiming to get back by Tuesday next week latest.

At this point, I’m considering submitting a proposal to schedule an upgrade at a future block height, even though the code isn’t available yet. To be very clear—this isn’t about drawing attention or creating unnecessary noise. It’s about giving validators some relief from mounting operational costs, and signaling the need for clarity from the team. A controlled pause lets us resume cleanly—either by skipping the upgrade or implementing the changes once the team provides proper direction.

If anyone is willing to support, the address is:
persistence1ugeaqajr5cs6fcfjkzh2euwj96gtr8a7hcyu5q
I can raise the proposal immediately if someone can transfer 3500.1 XPRT or transfer 0.1 XPRT with authz to any account that has 3500 XPRT for a software-governance proposal.

We are nearly 2 months after the proposal passed, but the decline has not stopped:

Even worse is that the amount of unique delegators is going down, which effectively means people are leaving the ship:

It is even harder to realize that the token price has dropped nearly 25% in the past 2 months since the proposal and for example ATOM is roughly the same value.

Can we now finally conclude this was the wrong step and have the conversations we should have?

It would be cool however if the team would also chip in @dneorej (who knows others to tag?)

Server ~100 USD per month
Person who maintain the node, update it - IDK, how much it can cost, but I agree with ~ 200$ per month

POSTHUMAN provide much more than node operation, we contribute for the development of Persistence on many different levels, and for me - it’s priceless

But for now, we are top-45 validator, with total stake 1,426,000 XPRT
With the price $0.06538 - we have ~ 70$ per month, in case if we will sell XPRT, but we don’t do it, and I think that this is mistake, because the price is only going down, and price for infrastructure in fiat, not in XPRT

For now, we are validating Persistence just because of friendship, because it’s totally unprofitable
This is kind contribution for the development of Cosmos Ecosystem
This is kind of charity

But of course this cannot continue indefinitely, and first of all we must provide charity to people who suffer from hunger, not to projects with multi-million dollar capitalization

You mentioned RWA, BTCFi, etc. — and yes, there’s potential there, but that’s the whole point: what exactly is being built, and how does it tie back to the chain and to XPRT holders? If the team is working on products that live off-chain, on other ecosystems, or with no clear feedback loop to XPRT, then how are we not just drifting toward irrelevance?

Look at how other Cosmos chains handled this:

• Cerberus was a meme coin — it knew what it was and didn’t pretend otherwise.
• Mars and Kujira built specific DeFi use cases, and when they saw the product/chain didn’t justify validator cost anymore, they communicated clearly and made tough decisions.
• Crescent had one of the best DEX experiences in Cosmos and far more liquidity than Persistence, but they still shut down when they saw the writing on the wall.

These chains saved their communities and validators thousands by being honest — they didn’t drag things out or offer fake hope.

High_Stakes:

No, I’m not suggesting sunsetting — that’s not the goal here. The intention is to figure out how to sustain validator participation without forcing them to operate at a loss, and to have an honest discussion about what’s being done to support XPRT holder value. It’s also about demanding more transparency from the team — especially around who’s leading what, and how resources are being allocated.

While sunsetting might eventually become the only viable option, I’ve also heard about potential chain merges being explored, which could simplify things by consolidating infrastructure — so that validators aren’t forced to maintain 3-4 separate networks.

As for BTCFi — yes, I’ve seen Jeroen’s tweets and it does look like something is happening. But what exactly is “progress” here? Intent-based swaps are not new — they’ve been around for a while. What is Persistence doing that sets this apart? Why would this product gain market share or mind share over existing solutions? And what’s to stop more established protocols from just adding BTC support and outcompeting Persistence?

Also, it’s worth mentioning that the Persistence team is launching a DEX on Babylon — which from the outside looks like a copy-paste job. Maybe that helps the team financially, but how does that in any way impact XPRT, the Persistence chain, or its community? Where’s the link between this new product and the actual token and chain we’re all supposed to be supporting?

Simply writing some smart contracts and designing a UI isn’t enough. That’s not a product — and it certainly isn’t meaningful progress without a clear go-to-market plan or differentiation strategy.

Of course if Persistence don’t change thing it’s the only futur …

They just have to find a way to make value ( RWA, btc fi , etc … There is a lot of possibilities ) but a Blockchain for a Blockchain is not valuable …

I agree with somes of your point and somes of @High_Stakes

For sure validators don’t make enough money ( and it’s the case of a lot of cosmos Blockchain … ) it’s why for now I don’t make ibc on my self of with snow fall validators