NEAR Classic: Reviving the Original Vision – A For the Community, By the Community Initiative with a NEAR Soft Fork

Ecosystem
, , , ,
1

NEAR Classic: Reviving the Original Vision – A For the Community, By the Community Initiative with a NEAR Soft Fork

Posted by: webuidl.near (WeBuiDL Collective)
Date: November 03, 2025
Tags: [Governance] [Fork Proposal] [Community Revival] [Tokenomics] [NDC Bootstrap]

Hello NEAR community – let’s take a moment to reflect on the early days of 2020:

  • Conversations filled with open ideas,
  • Guilds and DAOs forming naturally like everyday discussions,
  • Validators exchanging simple acknowledgments over network improvements.

Those times felt straightforward, with a relaxed approach to building without pressure. We arrived as early web3 adopters, drawn to the core idea: A world where people control their assets, data, and governance. We invested our early resources and time, trusting the open process to create something enduring.

The vision has evolved over time, hasn’t it? Like a classic vinyl record beginning to skip slightly, the original path becoming less smooth in small ways. Imagine playing that familiar album – the one that first inspired us – and hearing faint interruptions that weren’t there before. We have grown – the total value locked in the network increasing, with 15,859 holders remaining steady – but the pace has become inconsistent. There has been a tendency to chase the latest trends from other chains instead of focusing on our unique strengths, like sharding for scalability. Decentralized initiatives have been suddenly ended, with control shifting back to top-down decisions.

  • Guilds and DAOs experienced funding cycles that started promisingly but paused unexpectedly,
  • Leaving builders waiting while core operations continued steadily (often with far more support than grassroots efforts, though the long-term results in user adoption or total value locked seem limited).

The NDC’s cycle was a highlight – supporting over 100 community projects with about 400K NEAR in 2024 – but even that is winding down, with discussions about asset transfers (the trust is holding steady, a wise choice to wait for input). This reflects a broader trend: The move toward full decentralization has become more cautious. The 17.2% allocation from genesis for the community? It remains largely unused, serving as a reminder for those who committed fully from the start, with open hearts and resources, believing in the promise.

Genesis Token Allocation

image
image1024×580 69.6 KB

Openness? Early open discussions shifting to “trust the process.” Staking, with 755.43M in circulation, has become concentrated – larger holders controlling about 9%, the broader group 2%, and validator concentration showing the top 10 holding over 40% of stake. The classic symbol – our shared emblem – is losing its prominence. We have exchanged some collaborative growth for scale, while the community has dwindled and founders moved on. But the fundamental drive? It remains, ready for realignment.

Let’s move into NEAR Classic – a soft fork, without fanfare, as a parallel path to those roots. It runs alongside the main network; integrate successes back when appropriate. Nightshade remains unchanged, proof-of-stake reliable, starting with 5% inflation on a decreasing schedule (to 2.5%, 1.5%, 0.5% – not for appearance like the main network’s recent adjustment, but linked to milestones like network expansion). Open-source from the beginning: GitHub fork, contributions building the foundation. As a for the community, by the community initiative, it’s an open network that is permissionless – no approval needed to validate, join, or earn your stake through contribution.

$SHADE – a throwback to Nightshade, the protocol that started it all, with a light meme element for staking and decision-making. Value grows steadily over time, in a straightforward manner, starting at zero price to allow the economy to develop naturally (for web3 participants looking for a new base away from corporate influences – a reboot like Bitcoin, aiming to build a decentralized society, even if proof-of-stake has had challenges). Equal votes at the start – fork House of Stake, with airdrops to early contributors and NDC supporters (~5-10%) to distribute influence (to those who committed early, locked for 12-18 months, unlocked gradually later to ensure fairness). Staking provides returns that recognize contributions, but everyday uses build true activity (transaction fees, tips, operations – designed for payments, encouraging engagement). 100% gas burns for a deflationary effect (complete burn, creating scarcity without burden – gas under a cent, no need for large developer rewards). A paymaster covers fees for smooth access. Unused funds? Automatically burned if idle.

No foundation, no venture capital or backers – those allocations (~45.7%, plus core and early ecosystem) move to long-term lockups: 1-2 year delays, then 3-4 year gradual releases, voted on to reduce any early advantage (no fixed groups, open pools for continued contributions – early contributors get recognition, but newcomers have equal opportunity). No sale – a fair launch from the start, value from daily use.

NDC Trust Bootstrap: We are asking the NDC community to activate the trust as an initial resource: Assets held securely, used for quarterly grants (fixed amounts, no interruptions – immediate funding for the first round). This completes the loop – NDC’s initial support pushing Classic forward. Vote to approve, for the group it was intended to serve. The NDC treasury awaits a formal response from the enforcer regarding NEAR consent and if and how the continuation of the NDC trust will take place.

The rest follows naturally:

  • Tokenomics: $SHADE for governance flow – starting at zero, gradual unlocks later, drawing from locked allocations. Fair and building over time.
  • Governance: House fork – equal votes at the beginning, validators with early input. Progressive decentralization: Slow and steady, community-led.
  • Ecosystem: Quarterly grants for guilds, DAOs, DeFi, and social projects – wide bridges, emblem NFTs for early supporters.
  • Tech: Sharding plus light privacy tools for security. Meme DAOs to keep things engaging.

Easy Roll: Launch by Community Voice

A natural start with an open-source approach. Contributions begin quietly: Fork the repository, add improvements, $SHADE foundation builds slowly. Starting at zero? Keeps it genuine – activity creates worth. Milestones guide the path:

  • 100 Votes: Agreement reached – testnet begins (poll here).
  • 10 Validators: Date set gently (Dec 15, '20 reference). Validators compete via StakeWars to join the launch, decentralizing the network.
  • First 3 Up: Initial anchors – 5% pre-allocation (locked gradually, tied to contribution). Three for proof-of-concept flow – group grows from there.

Bounties in Week 1: Propose integration with NEAR intents, update governance documents. Telegram open: Telegram: Join Group Chat. Forks can diverge – ours aims to bring the best back together. Timelines depend on community engagement and available resources and can shift.

Now is a time for reflection and pause to truly determine the growth and decentralization of the NEAR ecosystem. This must be a community-driven initiative where no single voice has authority but instead the willingness and collaboration to create a better outcome. Let’s come together to shape this path forward – vote in the poll below to share your voice.

Community, the emblem is calling. Who is ready to revive the vision? Share your '20 stories, funding experiences, node thoughts.

TL;DR: Vision shifted – funding pauses, genesis unused, NDC discussions. NEAR Classic: Decreasing inflation (5% start), $SHADE gradual unlocks (Nightshade reference), NDC trust seed. 100 votes + 10 validators = launch; first 3 nodes receive allocations. Open – back to the flow?

Poll: Feeling Classic?

  • Yes - Let’s warp and fork.
  • No - Reject the fork.
  • Not Sure - Need more details.
0 voters

Share if it resonates. #NEARClassic #SHADENeverFades #WeBuiDL

image
image784×1168 223 KB

Charts: Genesis vs. now. Sources noted. DYOR.
webuidl.near – Moving Forward, Keeping the Promise.

Appendix: Sources

1 Like
2

Unfortunately, a large number of guilds and DAOs did not work out as intended. This was a mistake that NEAR, like many other ecosystems had to go through and learn from. There was a time when funding was abundant, the market was growing rapidly, and every ecosystem was competing to attract as many developers and users as possible, often at any cost. That’s how guilds and DAOs emerged that distributed funds to almost everyone without clear strategy or accountability and as a result, the outcomes were often questionable.

At Human Guild, we went through this experience ourselves, just like nearly every other guild that existed in the NEAR ecosystem. Over time, for NEAR it became clear that the focus on decentralization and grants for their own sake had to evolve into something more sustainable and thoughtful.

That’s why I don’t believe the funds allocated to the NDC Trust should once again be spent on unstructured grants or on financing another experiment such as the meme-coin initiative NEAR Classic.
If you wish to create a fork you absolutely have the right to do so. But if you intend to seek funding from NDC, the proper process would be to submit a proposal to the House of Stake and seek approval from token holders, rather than conducting a poll here on the forum.

One more point: in your current poll, there’s no option to vote against the idea of a fork.
Could you please add such an option, so that the community can express that position as well?

3 Likes
3

updated the no.

if it is determined near consent is needed for the trust and was indeed established it is a legitimate governance system within near. meaning also near foundation had no right to sunset it and impeded on the rights of the NDC Community who have rights based on their adopted constitution which was accepted to participate in NDC elections.

1 Like
4

Honestly haven’t read all of it and I’m not sure about any sort of fork… but I do think there is something to be said about the culture back then.

it’s a good throwback! There’s a certain awe I felt finding NEAR back in late 21’ and stumbling upon Sputnik DAO, the guilds, and then watching the NDC’s voting app come to life.

NEAR has always been able to attract and hold market share with heady, ambitious people, with aspirations of a practical, decentralized future. “A world where people control their assets, data, and governance.” is more tangible to me, and easier to talk to my neighbor about.

This is also why I am fully embracing HoS and I have delegated all my veNEAR to sleet.near

1 Like
5

Thank you for sharing your perspective.

I agree that some guilds and DAOs didn’t deliver as expected — but it’s important to recognize that many of them actually worked well until the NEAR Foundation started to systematically limit their autonomy and funding.

From a tokenomics perspective, a significant portion of NEAR’s funds technically belongs to the community, yet the Foundation seems to have forgotten this principle. DAOs haven’t disappeared — NEAR Council is a DAO, House of Stake is a DAO — the difference is that now they’re entirely controlled by NF itself. Ironically, NF spends more on internal “wellness” retreats than most DAOs ever did during their entire existence.

Grassroots DAOs were about openness, experimentation, and access — enabling new ideas and projects to emerge. What we’re seeing today, however, is the opposite: growing inefficiency, nepotism, and massive spending on validator nodes owned by NF’s close circle.

Even Illia often acknowledges that decentralization must return — but in practice, little changes. Just look at the House of Stake: NF is so afraid of real decentralization that it still directly or indirectly controls over 75% of key governance positions, while Lane finds every possible reason to delay the voting on proposals HoS-4 to HoS-13.

So yes — lessons were learned, but not in the way they should’ve been.

The community deserves real ownership, not just another layer of centralized oversight disguised as decentralization.

3 Likes
6

Oh, and I almost forgot to mention — NF has essentially bought out all the active degens in NEAR by creating the NEAR Legion to defend Illia’s decisions.
It’s a classic story from the real world — when a country’s leader forms special units to protect themselves from dissent and to secure loyalty to their agenda.

Sure, NF can do whatever it wants.
But a dead ecosystem, nepotism, corruption, and poor token performance won’t just disappear.

If we compare NEAR to a country, it’s currently at the level of a developing nation.
And considering the censorship, the deletion of critical messages, and the banning of dissenting voices — it’s starting to look like North Korea on steroids.

2 Likes
7

The MarketingDAO also still exists and is not controlled by NF. As a council member, I have not lost faith in the grassroots community experiment that we participated in for many years.

Of course mistakes were made but this proposal from @blaze seems to offer a second chance for those that care to support those that create.

Have voted YES and look forward to seeing future developments.

5 Likes
8

The NEAR Foundation is so scared of a fork they’re creating fake accounts to boost the “No” option? Lol

9

It seems to me that the author of this document has great artistic ambitions and a strong instinct for power. There have been such figures in history. You should definitely try yourself as an ideological leader and rally the masses of workers, peasants, and devops engineers behind you.

1 Like
10

It seems something forget to login into a real account.

11

a wonderful display of dialog already.
with some newcomers or masqueraded accounts.
the more voices the better. tell us more about your view point.

2 Likes
12

funny, so this logic can be applied to the ones who voted yes too, after all, it’s all open source, anyone can fork the chain and do whatever they want to do, gud luck

13

to clarify for all. the no votes have no weight here. the threshold/quorum was 100 votes to fork which is nearly impossible unless the community activates around this.

even then the number is not what matters here as the gov forum has limited reach. what does matter is a network of people present here or in back channels that believe we have the necessary alignment and support to fork the network.

a network fork was already planned and nearly executed prior but stopped short due to loss of support.

1 Like