Less friction = more completed sales, more real users holding $SAND.
Zero intermediary fees so value stays with creators
0.3 % platform fee + DEX spread.
0 % protocol fee; only gas .
Creators keep every token; higher earning potential attracts more builders.
Sandbox branding everywhere $SAND is spent
Neutral Thirdweb UI, no Sandbox colours.
Modal uses official palette & fonts.
Strengthens brand consistency and keeps players inside the Sandbox visual universe.
Governance under the DAO, not a private SaaS
Code, pricing and roadmap controlled by Thirdweb Inc.
Contract & SDK open-source, upgradeable by Sandbox DAO.
The community not a third party owns the payment rail and future .
On-chain metrics that are easy to follow
Payments are routed and sometimes swapped, obscuring true $SAND volume.
Every payment emits PaymentDone with clear $SAND amounts.
Transparent KPI dashboard = simple tracking.
Thirdweb Pay is a fine generic checkout; Pay-with-SAND is purpose-built for our token, zero-fee, single-click, Sandbox-branded, and governed by the DAO not a SaaS provider.
Discovery: Heard about the Sandbox DAO Grants via Questbook.
It’s not clear to me how your solution works. Could you please provide many more details about it, and share information such as your portfolio, social media, and LinkedIn to verify your experience?
Hi Yuelwolf, thank you for reviewing my application.
Below you’ll find a deeper dive into how the solution works, plus my professional background and public links for verification.
Please edit the original post so we have the project more organized and don’t create a new post for each update. Tag me once you’ve made the changes. The way you’re presenting the information is confusing to me, as I see two different portfolios and people. Additionally, the proposal is still unclear. You’re talking about a one-year roadmap with integrations across a large number of ecosystems, which doesn’t align with the milestones in the initial proposal. I need a clear roadmap and corresponding milestones so we can evaluate the proposal.
NovaTheMachine is simply my dev handle , my real name, Gérald , is on the GitHub and LinkedIn , so it should be clear we’re talking about one person.
The forum is limited to two links, so i used a google drive.
As for the timeline, the one-year roadmap was explicitly labelled “future vision”; the grant request itself is limited to the three milestones .
Thanks for the clarification! I’d like to dive a bit deeper into how you envision the user experience. Any UI sketches would also be very helpful to see how this mini-SDK would function when integrated into a web page.
I’ve just updated the proposal with a user flow and embedded the actual Pay-with-SAND modal UI sketch. Let me know if you’d like any tweaks or more context!
What differentiates or what is the value proposition of this mini-SDK compared to other existing solutions in the market, such as Thirdweb Pay, among many others that already offer ready-to-integrate payment systems?
Thanks for the support @sebga i appreciate. yes , contract, UI, and SDK are all designed to be upgraded or extended; today it’s 100 % SAND, tomorrow we can toggle on additional tokens or features with a DAO-approved upgrade .
I agree that security is extremely important, I’ve thought about it from the beginning, that’s why I’ve planned a security audit. If that’s one of your questions, the smart contract and the code won’t be modifiable without us realizing it, there’s little chance that attacks will come from there. From the smart contract point of view, I’ve done everything to reduce the attack surface, there will be one or two public functions and the contract will not store tokens.
I’ve been reviewing the contract auditing process, and unfortunately, I found that on platforms like Code4rena, the rewards are quite high to attract Wardens to review the contract. This means $3k would likely be insufficient to get a quality review on such platforms.
I suggest two alternatives: either look for an option that fits the budget on other platforms or with verified professionals, or change the project’s approach to use a third-party contract that guarantees security.
Hashlock.com has agreed to audit our gateway for $3 k , they normally quote $5 k minimum.
In parallel, I’ve lined up an extra pass from independent warden Jacobo Lansac (GitHub → GitHub - JacoboLansac/audits) for €500.
That second review gives us another set of eyes without blowing the budget.
With those two layers we stay within the original $3 k envelope yet still get a recognised firm plus a seasoned warden on the code. Let me know if that satisfies the security requirement or if you’d like me to explore further options.
