Introducing Instant Governance:
1/ Delighted to announce that 1INCH Token is LIVE! š
Learn more about the governance/utility token and the token architecture:
https://t.co/6POyBLHmKO
ā¬ļø
Introducing Instant Governance:
Upgraded & rebranded the v1 AMM @mooniswap
Introducing ā 1inch Liquidity Protocol
šāāļøWhere users can vote on Spread Surplus settings (positive slippages)
šāāļøAnd reward to stakers with a Governance Reward
Read more:
šPools can directly govern their own parameters:
Starts Dec. 28 for 6 pools. 0.5 percent of 1inch token supply to be distributed to these liquidity providers for the first two weeks.
* All wallets registered before December 24, midnight (UTC), will receive 1INCH tokens as long as they meet one of the following conditions:
* At least one trade before September 15Ā
ORĀ
* At least 4 trades in totalĀ
ORĀ
* At least $20 in total volume.
āļøOver $7.5 billion of assets swapped through the https://t.co/fLXva1SFRG
āļø57,000 + unique users
āļø$2.2m saved on Gas via the 1inch GasToken
āļø$119.34m assets deposited into v1 of our liquidity protocol, @mooniswap
More from Government
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
