Gm fellow Cloudmen 
I have taken the time to carefully read all the posts on the Reasarch forum and to reflect on the discussion from my first post (originally on Discord) about Sanctum DAO governance and the associated utilities of the $CLOUD token.
I now count myself among those who believe that the community should not decide whether or not a particular LST should be created. In my view, the more streamlined and seamless the process, the better it will be for facilitating widespread adoption of LSTs.
I particularly appreciate @cszd’s quote on the matter: ‘Sanctum should create mechanisms that allow everyone to launch LSTs. Additionally, Sanctum should not have the authority to approve the launch of LSTs; it should only conduct safety checks.’
Complicating the process could hinder innovation while the ‘useless’ LSTs will naturally fade away (no one will hold their LST if the value proposition isn’t solid).
I think what makes Sanctum exceptional isn’t just its revolutionary concept of a liquidity layer for LSTs, but also the marketing power provided by Wonderland.
Incorporating a Wonderland season guarantees any LST significant notoriety and the potential to attract substantial capital, at least temporarily.
Who better than the Sanctum DAO ($Cloud holders) to carefully analyze the value proposition of LST projects and decide which should benefit from Wonderland (and Wonderland quests)?
Indeed, while I support the creation of numerous LST projects, I would like the best among them to receive additional support for their launch.
We could also envision other types of marketing activations made available by Sanctum. For example, integrating Blink to allow anyone on Twitter to purchase an LST directly from a Sanctum account post announcing a Wonderland quest (providing a seamless experience that reduces friction and facilitates adoption of the LST in question).
All of this (Wonderland, Twitter posts with Blink, and other ideas to be identified) could be part of the ‘Sanctum verified’ package valid for one Wonderland season (3-6 months).
The community would decide (vote using staked $Cloud) which projects are ‘worthy of inclusion in the Sanctum verified list’ (a maximum number of projects per season).
Taking a broader view, this means that all stakeholders are incentivized to grow the ecosystem:
- Sanctum team: % of fees generated by the Sanctum router
- Liquidity providers ($INF holders): % of fees generated by the Sanctum router
- Cloud DAO* voters: % of the ‘earnestness’ allocation from each Wonderland season
- Wonderland quests players: % of the ‘capital’ allocation from each Wonderland season and might be rewarded by LST projects based on pets’ experience (ie. Pathfinders gave WL for Wonderland S1 pet holders)
- LST projects: Sanctum allows them to exist without a minimum TVL requirement
- Top LST projects: Cloud DAO enables them to launch under the best conditions
*There could be many other ways to contribute as a Cloud DAO member (being active, helping others, voting on other decisions such as WG creation, getting involved in WGs, etc.).
I’d be more than happy to know the Cloudmen’s opinions about this first role and utility proposition for both Cloud DAO and $Cloud token.
