Debunking Myths and Navigating Standards
TL;DR
Doginals currently refer to both text-based (drc-20) & image-based data
There is no race for the Doginal standard. The valid standard has long been established: based on brc-20, indexing from block 0, and confirmed by the community, DEXs, and major players.
Discrepancies in drc-20 token balances are temporary and due to different indexing start dates and criteria set by various solutions.
Invalid tokens are those minted after a supply cap has been reached, as per drc-20 standards. A compensation mechanism for these invalid tokens is in the works.
We’re focused on establishing a rock-solid drc-20 indexing solution and getting major players involved.
The legitimacy of Doginals is not up for debate. If you’re unsure, ask yourself if a minority should decide when the blockchain starts.
Welcome back to the Doge Labs blog, Shibes! 🚀 We’ve been noticing some foggy weather in the Doginals universe, with different understandings of the indexing standard and some interpretations causing more confusion than clarity.
So, let’s clear the fog and understand the current situation better together. But first, a little history lesson…
The Rise of Doginals: A Brief Journey
Back in February 2023, a developer known as “Apezord” pioneered the Doginal standard, releasing the first Shibescription, “0” (image-based).
A community started to evolve and amongst thousands of Shibescriptions ranging from texts to images to gifs, someone deployed the inaugural drc-20 token, $DOGI, with a supply cap of 21 million.
After this initial burst of activity, progress in the drc-20 space appeared to stall due to challenges posed by Dogecoin’s random block rewards (read more about that here).
Undeterred, other projects began joining the Doginals ecosystem, but struggled to establish a reliable indexing infrastructure. In response, they planned to create a new solution that would begin indexing from 0 once ready.
This is where Doge Labs stepped in. Recognizing the potential and challenges of drc-20, we developed and provided a fully functioning indexing solution. Now, with this operational foundation in place, drc-20 is not only established but poised for growth. This journey marked the beginning of an exciting era for drc-20 tokens.
Defining drc-20: No Room for Ambiguity
There seems to be a misconception that drc-20 is a standard up for grabs, with multiple interpretations vying for validation. We want to lay it down once and for all:
There is no race for the drc-20 standard. The only valid drc-20 is based on brc-20, which indexes from block 0.
Drc-20 was already decided before we came into the picture. Any deviations from this are not authentic representations of drc-20, but driven by centralization and greed (at least we can’t think of any other driving factors). This has been confirmed for us with every single discussion we have had with the community, DEXs, and other major players.
Now, there are some nuances that even brc-20 falls short to define clearly, such as, “Is it legit to view numbers in the amount (amt) field as valid or only a string? Ordiscan does accept it, Unisat doesn’t.”
However, these minor undefined bits shouldn’t distract us from the bigger picture. As we continue to align with the strict rules set by Unisat, we know we are 100% in sync with the legitimate drc-20 standard.
And to make things clear, it’s not us defining the standard; we are just establishing an ecosystem based on the rules that are clearly laid out for drc-20. Drc-20 is a lot bigger than any single players.
Why are there approaches that deviate from drc-20? Re: Authenticity vs Opportunism
There are two primary reasons why some players might deviate from the standard:
Technological incapacity: In the early stages of Dogecoin’s development, specifically within the first 145,000 blocks, the block rewards were not uniform in amount. Neither did they follow a halving system commonly used in other cryptocurrencies. Instead, each block came with a random reward. It takes a lot of knowledge and resources to get that solved. Read more about the indexing challenge on the Dogecoin network here: https://bit.ly/doginals
Greed: Being the first token in any blossoming ecosystem carries great value by itself. People who missed out on early inscripting on drc-20 could very well want to change the rules so as to have another chance to deploy first.
Re 1: Some may argue that the random block sizes in the Dogecoin network present a technological challenge that is too big to overcome, but that’s no longer the case. With our skilled team, we’ve successfully tackled this challenge and are now ready to offer API access to our indexer for all drc-20 builders. Not starting from block 0 is like removing Satoshi’s BTC because some people didn’t participate in 2009.
Re 2: As for greed, well, courage and tech always end up triumphing in the end. We believe all builders will build on the authentic drc-20 standard.
We understand that current inconsistencies and deviations have led to confusion for the entire community. We encourage you to keep educating yourself and make your decisions based on your findings.
Understanding Discrepancies in Token Balances
We’ve noticed that some of you are experiencing discrepancies in token balances across different platforms. This confusion arises due to one major difference in the two currently available indexing solutions.
Both solutions adhere to the drc-20 standard: However, unlike Doge Labs, which began indexing from Shibescription 0 on February 24th, other indexers began indexing starting in mid-May 2023 and ignore all transactions prior to this date.
Some indexers censored transactions and inscriptions prior to this date due to the random block size challenge, but this issue has since been resolved. These overlooked transactions no longer need to be discounted, and this discrepancy is now a matter of choice as opposed to technological limitations.
It’s important for the drc-20 community to understand these temporary nuances and stay informed about the situation. In the meantime, you can check your actual balances at https://drc-20.org/wallet/balances
Understanding Invalid Tokens
To clarify why some tokens are labeled as ‘invalid’, let’s consider $DOGI as an example. $DOGI was originally deployed in March 2023 with a total supply of 21 million (Shibescription).
However, this wasn’t indexed by all solutions, leading to another deployment of “2.1 billion $DOGI.”
Since the original $DOGI was already maxed out, all subsequent mints are classified as invalid under the drc-20 standard. As you can see, the community also agrees on $DOGI with a supply of 21 million as the first drc-20 token.
Navigating Invalid Tokens: Hope is not Lost
We need to be very clear in this case: Mints inscribed after the total supply as been reached are and will always stay invalid! But…
If you’re holding invalid tokens, don’t worry! We’re working on a solution that will bring value to these tokens and offer compensation to those misled by inaccuracies. Stay tuned for more information on this!
The Road Ahead
Our focus remains on establishing a rock-solid drc-20 indexing solution for the whole ecosystem to build upon. Besides that, we are focusing on getting DEXs and other major players involved, as well as making trading seamless.
Parting Words: A Reality Check
If you’re still unsure about the legitimacy of other solutions over drc-20, here are some questions to ask yourself:
Is it valid for a minority to decide the official start of the blockchain, especially at the cost of disregarding the genesis block?
Are more than 40k individuals, including significant entities in web3, ready to throw away their investments?
Remember, understanding is the first step towards clarity. We’re all in this together, Shibes!
