Many frogs including myself were forced to deleverage their position at a loss in order to not get liquidated. My liquidation price and many others were well under the backing price, but still ended up getting put at risk from the liquidation cascade. I ended up deleveraging a portion of my position around 35k wMemo and then the rest at around the lows at 24k wMemo because I was on the verge of getting liquidated. Even though I was able to avoid liquidation, I and many others in the same position lost a lot as a result of being forced to deleverage well below backing price in order to not lose everything from liquidation. I had 85 memo before the liquidation cascade and I am now left with 12 memo. Lost 72 memo of my position in the aftermath.
So I have a simple proposal,
Yay to bailing out those who were forced into deleveraging their positions well below backing price in order to avoid liquidation.
Or,
Nay to not include those who deleveraged right before liquidation in the bailout.
I was not liquidated, still holding a 75% down MEMO, but I am sympathetic to those frogs which mismanaged risk. By frogs I mean people holding up to 1 MEMO, that must be put in rehab (receive MEMO or SPELL locked, with a 12 mo cliff/vesting) until learn how to play in crypto. Folks investing more than 1 MEMO with leverage are most likely snakes, not frogs, and can bear with the situation; they could receive just 1 MEMO (SPELL?), without any vesting schedule.
Anyone who leveraged in this highly volatile market should have known they were taking a big risk. With the prices of almost all assets trending rapidly down, leveraging is a very poor decision. I say, let those who made the mistake, learn from the consequences and not punish the rest of us even more than we already have been.
We’ve already been subject to the huge price drops due to the liquidations of those who made the mistake of leveraging, why should we be forced to lose more by repaying people who made a mistake?
I think repaying those who leveraged their position is unfair compared to those who didn’t. Even putting BTC as collateral is risky, so what did you expect with wMEMO? How I see this project, it has a good structure with popsicle finance, abracadabra, wonderland and now sushi.
Consider yourself lucky to complain somewhere with your losses. I could do the same, I’ve lost a lot as well. But this situation is not because of a hack or a bug, which case it would make sense to ask for a compensation.
If you used leverage, you knew the risks, nobody forced you to do anything, and asking for your money back now is beyond absurd. It’s actually pathetic. If you can’t take the heat, then you shouldn’t have been there to begin with. The treasury is not the Federal Reserve, to bail out over leveraged gamblers.
Sad to see so many frogs so unsympathetic towards other frogs who lost their money leveraging. The whole basis around Wonderland succeeding is the strength of its community, but when you have a community so divisive and so okay with kicking other frogs to the curb, it hard for me to see this project succeeding. In the end, we all took risk in leveraging. In fact, the project was a risk in itself. So even though many didn’t leverage directly, we were all leveraging by simply being invested in a experimental project that had been only 4 months out. So It makes me shake my head when I see those who make fun of the people who are asking for reimbursement from losing their money from leveraging, because now those that were laughing and berating are now crying and asking to be reimbursed because the price has gone to shit. But then again this whole project was a risk from the start and could go to zero, we all knew what we were getting into, so why would any of us deserve a reimbursement. The hypocrisy of people sometimes…sigh, but me personally, I’ll be fine, I lost money but I should be able to make it back just fine. Just thought that other frogs would want to support others frogs.