TELIP: Unified Web Presence – Research, UX & Prototyping Phase

Council Proposals TELIP
1

TELIP: Unified Web Presence – Research, UX & Prototyping Phase

Author: Nick (@bluelights)
Council: Platform Council – Developers / Miner Group

Background

Following the earlier TIP: Unified Web Presence for the Telcoin Ecosystem ( TIP: Unified Web Presence for the Telcoin Ecosystem ) (Now classified as a TELIP) the Platform Council has progressed discussions with an external design partner to help translate the proposal into a structured, validated plan.

The original TIP outlined the need to consolidate Telcoin’s fragmented web presence into a single, authoritative entry point under telcoin.network, with a clear and scalable subdomain model covering governance, developers, documentation, DeFi, and ecosystem resources.

This update is intended to share visibility with the community on how that vision is being approached, starting with a research-led foundation rather than moving directly into development.

Why Start with Research & Prototyping

As the ecosystem grows in visibility and complexity, moving straight into design or development without alignment increases the risk of rework and fragmentation.

Current challenges include:

  • Multiple independent sites built at different times

  • Inconsistent navigation and information structure

  • Friction for developers, operators, partners, and new users

  • No validated “front door” that clearly explains how the ecosystem fits together

In addition to user experience challenges, the current multi-domain structure also fragments search engine visibility. Content, authority, and inbound links are spread across several domains and subdomains, weakening overall SEO performance and making it harder for users, developers, and partners to discover authoritative Telcoin resources through organic search. A unified entry point allows search relevance, trust signals, and ecosystem narratives to be consolidated rather than diluted.

This phase focuses on defining and validating the structure first, so future work is built on a shared, approved foundation.

Scope of This Phase

This is a UX/UI Research & Prototyping phase, not a full website build.

1. Ecosystem Discovery & Audit

  • Review of existing Telcoin Association web properties

  • Identification of friction in key user journeys

  • High-level benchmarking against comparable blockchain and payments ecosystems

2. Stakeholder & User Research

  • Interviews with key Telcoin Association stakeholders

  • Input from operators, developers, and ecosystem participants

  • Alignment on governance constraints and success criteria

3. Unified Information Architecture

  • Definition of a single primary entry point (telcoin.network)

  • Clear, role-based paths for:

    • Developers

    • Operators / validators

    • Partners

    • Investors

    • General users

  • A scalable subdomain model covering governance, forums, documentation, developer resources, and ecosystem content

4. Clickable High-Fidelity Prototype

  • A working, clickable prototype (not just wireframes)

  • Demonstrates navigation, hierarchy, and user flows

  • Allows councils and stakeholders to experience the structure

  • Used to validate direction before any development begins

5. Validation & Alignment

  • Mid-phase review for early alignment

  • End-of-phase review with council

  • Produces an approved structural foundation for future phases

Timeline

  • Duration: ~4 weeks

  • Interim review: End of Week 2

  • Final review: End of Week 4 (validated architecture + prototype)

This phase is intentionally short and focused, designed to de-risk later stages.

Costs (Indicative, Converted to USD)

Figures below are approximate conversions from GBP to USD and shared for transparency only.

UX/UI Research & Prototyping Phase

  • Estimated effort: ~208 hours

  • Approx. cost: $11,000 – $12,000 USD

Optional: Logo & Visual Identity Refresh

  • Lightweight refinement aligned with the validated structure

  • Approx. cost: ~$4,000 USD

  • Optional and not required to proceed

Indicative Full Implementation Range (After Research, UX & Prototyping Phase)

Based on the validated structure and the complexity of the existing ecosystem, a high-level indicative range for a full implementation has been outlined:

  • Estimated effort: ~1,400 – 1,800 hours

  • Indicative range: ~$57,000 – $76,000 USD

Important clarifications:

  • This is not a quote

  • This is not being approved at this stage (Although the funds are for allocation)

  • A fixed proposal would only follow once:

    • The information architecture is approved

    • Role-based user journeys are validated

    • Technical and CMS decisions are confirmed

    • Content scope across subdomains is agreed

What This (Research, UX & Prototyping Phase) Does Not Do

To avoid scope confusion, this phase does not:

  • Build or migrate live websites

  • Lock in technical implementation choices

  • Commit the Association to a full delivery contract

  • Replace or redesign existing applications

Its sole purpose is clarity, alignment, and validation.

Why This Matters

This approach ensures:

  • A single, coherent entry point for the ecosystem

  • Council and community visibility before major spend

  • Cleaner onboarding paths for developers and partners

  • A structure that can scale without future fragmentation

In short: define once, build with confidence.

Next Steps

  • Send to snapshot for council vote

  • Complete the research and prototyping phase

6 Likes
TIP: Unified Web Presence for the Telcoin Ecosystem
2

I 100% fully support this TELIP. We’ve discussed it at length and is a top priority as we head into getting to mainnet.

We need to unify all of our sites asap and this initial prototyping phase is the fist big step in doing that. Thanks Nick for spearheading this and getting us to this stage.

1 Like
3

Thank you, Nick, for your hard work on this proposal. Establishing a single, authoritative entry point under telcoin.network is essential.

Equally important is conducting interviews with key Telcoin Association stakeholders to gain an in depth understanding of our stakeholders.

Clear, role-based paths should be defined for:

  • Developers

  • Operators / Validators

  • Partners

  • Investors

  • General Users

This will ensure a unified, user-focused web presence that serves all audiences effectively.

4

This proposal is live on snapshot

https://snapshot.org/#/s:telcoinplatformcouncil.eth/proposal/0x2b04633969789d426cc86e68ba96e93eb6b127e53adf6c266bac5a345204f01a

5

After passing the Platform council vote, the proposal is now live on the Treasury Council space here: Snapshot

1 Like
6

Recommandation towards TELIP: Unified Web Presence for the Telcoin Ecosystem

  1. About the danger of emphasizing « Network » Instead of « Infrastructure » or « TEL »

“Network” is:

  • generic in several area of usage

  • diluted already in web2 era

  • not even adding value to web3 & DLT projects, compared to « nodes »

  • non-proprietary,

  • potentially increasingly devalued by even telecom operators themselves, while they outsource and commoditize their own 4G or 5 G networks…

While in contrast, infrastructure at least carries real strategic meaning , as per example :

  • telecom infrastructure

  • settlement infrastructure

  • Layer1 infrastructure

  • financial infrastructure

…even if infrastructure itself is too long a word for fair use as a Domain Name, and not available at such in web DNS.

On the contrary,

TEL extension smartly carries brand meaning as well as the Telcoin project «commons » , or should we say at least TELcoin project…. – smarter then “Telco.in” –

………within simply ONLY three strategic «capital» letters T-E-L (italic , or bold, whatever, upper or lower case, etc )….

Platform Council proposing to use “network” as the central term, risks placing telcoin in the same category as every organization , every chain, every subnet, every rollup—erasing at this stage the smart differentiation, obscuring the initial telecom intrinsic value proposition, and… weakening stakeholders further perception of it !

Therefore , the following strategic recommendation regarding TELIP “Unified Web Presence for the Telcoin Ecosystem” :

According to all of this, given :

  • TELcoin’s public ambition to build the INTERNET of Money,

  • the governance framework initiated by this TELIP,

  • the need for a consolidated strategic and professional digital architecture for communications , especially soon targeting consumers and end users

  • the exceptional symbolic and semantic power of TEL , inherited as a telecom “commons”

  • the strategic relevance, availability, and accessibility of the untapped .TEL gTLD for domain names , while DN are known as helping to navigate any INTERNET therefore why not the INTERNET of Money

  • ease of access to .TEL premium domains available on the primary market, or to specific TEL domain names which can always be accessed on the secondary market ,

  • and the existing risk of value destruction if alternatives are chosen,

the following governance recommendations are proposed here after .

The TELcoin Platform Council might consider to, at least :

  • identify, in parallel or in replacement of « telcoin.network » centric study, AND have evaluated by professionals, of a better navigation Strategy for B2C using dot TEL-anchored domains

  • evaluate sourcing of some .TEL domain properties which can be acquired on primary or secondary markets, or alternatively secured easily like renting or leasing

  • determine asap chances to fast secure such plans to ensure to deploy the soonest such new communication, or prepare alternatives in order to match in due time the growing communication needs identified for better future reach of mobile end users

  • suggest guidance for alignment of future TELcoin public communications, product verticals, ecosystem touchpoints,

with final goal to :

  • reinforce “TEL” as the core identity, brand, and publicly known token ticker , while already a telecom « commons » , to become obvious and self explanatory to consumers navigating the new INTERNET of Money

  • capitalize , leverage, and converge via legacy dot TEL gTld, all efforts in the telcoin ecosystem to build long term value, fueled daily for all users, actors and partners by an underlying basic but finally necessary commodity…. the TEL token .

Failure to do so at this point of time, may bring risks, to be amplified at later stages, to :

  • dilute ecosystem trust,

  • fragment brand equity,

  • reduce SEO performance,

  • impair telecom and institutional partnerships,

  • facilitate divergence and forks from initial strategy alignment,

Hence , this would

  • squander a strategic branding opportunity bringing high value and convergence to the whole ecosystem , which cannot be replicated by other web3 ecosystems in competition if smartly managed

  • require formal advice and guidance back from Telcoin , not to jeopardize definitively unmatched initial value so far inherited via tel the telecom “commons” upon launching the project called “telcoin”.

TEL must remain the white stone of the building of the “Unified Web Presence for the Telcoin Ecosystem”.

Focusing on telcoin.network domain , and not evaluating opportunities to use .TEL appropriately as available domain names extension to answer the reckoned need for Unified Web Presence is strange, and should be at least questionable .

7

Thanks for the detailed write-up @TELhub — these points deserve a direct response.

On .network being “generic”
This framing doesn’t hold up when you look at what’s actually using .network across the industry. it’s become the de facto domain convention for serious blockchain infrastructure projects. Domain registrars explicitly recommend it for Layer 1s, staking infrastructure, and ecosystem hubs.

The precedent is hard to argue with:
∙ avax.network - Avalanche’s official domain. Top 10 market cap L1, billions in institutional backing, AWS and Deloitte partnerships. They chose .network and built one of the most recognized brands in the space around it.
∙ lightning.network - Bitcoin’s primary scaling layer. Probably the most well-known .network domain in crypto.
∙ maticnetwork- Polygon launched with “Matic Network” baked into its identity. The GitHub organization is still Polygon (previously Matic) · GitHub today.
∙ oasis.network - Privacy-focused L1, raised over $45M, strong institutional presence.
∙ celo.network - Mobile-first payments blockchain, arguably the closest peer to Telcoin in mission and target audience.
∙ skale.network, livepeer.network, polymath.network - all credible, well-funded infrastructure projects that made the same call.

These teams had full flexibility in choosing their domain. They picked .network because it communicates exactly what they are: infrastructure, not a company or a consumer product. Telcoin belongs in that category, and telcoin.network signals that clearly.

On the .TEL gTLD
This is where I’m Going to disagree slightly. The .TEL gTLD has a complicated history - ICANN originally created it for a very specific purpose: storing contact information and phone directories. It was essentially a structured data format for telecom contact pages, not a general web presence TLD. That legacy association exists whether we acknowledge it or not.
Beyond the history, the practical concerns are real: .TEL domains carry significantly lower SEO authority than established TLDs, browser trust and recognition are limited, and acquiring premium .TEL domains on secondary markets would come at meaningful cost with uncertain return. The symbolic appeal of TEL-as-telecom-commons is understandable, but a domain extension isn’t the right vehicle for that branding work. the token, the technology, and the communications strategy are.

On TEL as a brand asset
Full agreement here - TEL is genuinely one of Telcoin’s most underutilized assets. Three letters, a telecom commons, a token ticker, and a natural shorthand for an entire category of infrastructure. That strength should absolutely be front and center across all communications, product verticals, and ecosystem touchpoints. But that’s a brand strategy conversation, not a domain name conversation. telcoin.network anchors the network itself while TEL continues to serve as the core identity layer everywhere it matters.

The research phase should proceed as scoped. If there’s genuine interest in a .TEL domain strategy audit, that’s worth adding to scope - but evaluated by professionals with actual SEO and domain authority data, not decided here. The burden of proof should be on demonstrating .TEL outperforms .network for the target use cases: B2C mobile users, MNO partners, institutional relationships. That case hasn’t been made yet.
telcoin.network puts Telcoin alongside Avalanche, Lightning, Celo, and Oasis. That’s good company to be in, and it’s not an accident those projects made the same choice.hh

1 Like