Open-Sourcing Algo.fun Shares System

Category: Defi
Ask: 200,000 Algo

Summary

• Open-sourcing of the Algofun Shares System

• Algo.fun is a proof-of-work for tokenizing a platform and it’s proceeds in a fully on-chain manner

• The Algo.fun Shares System (>$20,000~ of Algo distributed, exactly 41,556 Algo at time of writing)

Details

The Algo.fun Shares system is an on-chain implementation that can be repurposed for any platform that would like to tokenize ownership and assign shares to users so that they can receive a relative portion of any proceeds generated on that platform.

Rewards are injected into the contract via a public contract method, any foreign contract logic that would receive proceeds, or forward them to a particular wallet or treasury, could instead submit inner transactions to their instance of a shares system to passively disperse those rewards to share holders.

Alternatively, proceeds can manually be injected by the platform into their instance of a shares system if they do not have access to changing their current contract logic.

This removes any centralized logic or “Trust”-based agreements between platforms and users where rewards are distributed via some air drop schedule, and immediately provides users access to proceeds as they are generated.

An example of the shares system in production can be seen here, where the contract has received over 40,000 Algo in proceeds from a sister platform, and has distributed those in a stateful manner for users to claim at any time:

https://explorer.perawallet.app/application/3296215208/

Is Application Live: Yes

Application Will Be Open-sourced: Yes

Team

• Leo Costa

• Allan Diamante

• Ulrik Diamante

Previous Works

• rxelms.com

• algo-learn.com & Python on AVM Youtube Tutorial series

• algonfts.info

• leostxs.com

• AF Wallet Watcher

Additional Info

Could you elaborate on the usage of each service? E.g. how many tokens were launched, how much volume has the DEX generated, or how many games were played? Since when are these live? How many users does each one have?

Overall, I still fail to see how these services are connected and/or what is novelty of each individual part. Further, I think this proposal could further be broken down into multiple, separate ones.

Moreover, based on the past controversies regarding related proposals, I would prefer the work were open-sourced in advance rather than only after approval. This would enable xGovs to better assess the benefits of the delivered work.

Good morning,

All services are tied to the Algofun Shares system, which is the meat of the proposal.

The launch date for the shares system and shares distribution was 10/27/2025. Not to add confusion but you will see that this is the same date AVM Email sister platform also went live (which now has a separate proposal as requested)

The Shares System and Petition System are the only services that are in production.

Funding this proposal would jumpstart our initiative on making all of Algo.fun’s developments open-sourced, but we sadly cannot open-source its content without having a better understanding of what past controversy that occurred in the xGov system you are speaking of.

Even if there was a past controversy, which we were not involved in, I don’t believe that should mandate all proposers open-source first — as then the option to conditionally open-source should not exist at all if this is the case.

Regarding whether or not the proposal should be broken down, the ask amount would stay the same, we can remove the references to the other services offered but that would not change the fact that even if the shares system implementation was open-sourced, the entire platform would be open-sourced. But if this is what would be preferred we can do so.

An additional note for metrics, there are over 100 users who own shares and have received portions of revenue that can be claimed on their own accord at any time, and are automatically generated from usage of any affiliated applications.

Regarding usage, do I understand correctly that out of the 11 promoted products only 2 are live? These 2 have 100 users and have distributed 20k ALGO within the last 6 months?

Overall, it is unclear to me what these main 2 products provide and how they work. E.g. do the users have to be active in any way or do they just passively receive the rewards?
How many have claimed the rewards? How many times?
Can you provide links to the deployments to strengthen the claims?

Regarding controversies, I was referring to your past proposals - AF watcher, where the value was promoted to be in its execution, consistency, maintenance and contributions to the ecosystem, while the watcher was offline for a substantial time after the proposal was approved; as well as w.r.t. the last proposal, which served as a basis for this one, was flagged by the xGov Council as non-compliant with the program’s T&Cs. The proposal was also rejected by the majority of xGovs.

IMO, without open-sourcing in advance, it is highly unlikely there will be a different result this time. W.r.t. the efficiency of the ecosystem, it would be beneficial that the proposal would be resubmitted only if it were materially improved.

Correct on the number of products being in production, if it’s confusing we can pick the products not in production out but that has no benefit as the ask amount will not change, and we will still open-source them as well. I will remove products that are not live from the proposal.

The exact amount is 41,566 Algo, a modest $20,000 for price range of Algo was observed previously.

The funds are injected on-chain from other app deployments, they can also be injected by anyone and via outer transaction as this is a method and public. Users must manually interact with the contract to claim, but they are generated passively. Out of the 41,566 Algo only 5,705 Algo are unclaimed — I can only assume users are leaving them there for now, but there is a chance some are not aware they were granted shares but that is another story.

Here is a link to the application, the fees earned can be verified in global state: https://explorer.perawallet.app/application/3296215208/

For an exact number of claims, who has claimed and how many times they have claimed that would require a bit of digging if you insist, but let me know as finding that information is an analytical endeavor.

Regarding the AF Watcher, which I am not too fond to see coming up again — the watcher going offline was out of my control, and out of my observance. I still stand by the fact that no one reached out to me to let me know it was offline — the X API free tier was deprecated, and I have since then not only converted to the pay-per-use subscription plan as a courtesy but have also upgraded the watcher to monitor and tweet new proposals as well as daily proposal summaries since then.

We also began working on and provided a discord alternative immediately, but only 3 or 4 people used it — I would appreciate if these things were taken into consideration, and not used as a reason to force us to open-source unconditionally if we want to pursue funding, as I don’t see others having this restriction applied to them mandatorily.

~~ @uhudo I discussed with team and the consensus is we just open-source the Gainify contracts, Algofun Shares System, and AVM Email contracts — they are minimally documented and will contain no test files, frontend codebase, or any other supplementary files. We understand the risk of blindly accepting proposal TnC for conditional open-sourcing right now and feel its the least we could do to make your lives easier. We have uploaded Gainify contracts so far, we will add AVM Email & Algofun Shares System by tomorrow.

Edit: All contracts added 04/06/2026 10PM EST

atsoc1993/xGov-Proposals-Contracts: The Contracts for the Algo.fun Shares System, AVM Email, and Gainify Staking

About the formalities, the currently shared repo still does not meet T&Cs.
An open-source license is missing and the repo hasn’t been added to Electric Capital.
I also think joining again all proposals in the same repo adds back the confusion about the proposals.
Just sharing the contracts without the accompanying tests and documentation, i.e. a partial proposal, IMO still doesn’t meet T&Cs (while I know some other xGov Council members are more lenient on these points than me).

On the content side, I skimmed the shared repo and noticed the petition system is missing.
IMO, just the Algofun Shares System doesn’t provide sufficient novelty and/or quality of execution w.r.t. to the ask. But this is up for all xGovs to vote on.

I’d advise you to focus only on one proposal first, not multiple simultaneously. IMO the AVM Email proposal has the highest chances of passing.

Ok — we will place Algofun Shares System & Gainify proposals on hold — then for AVM Email, fully open-source, add license, document, and add repo to Electric capital.