Again guys,
Let’s vote for it…
5 Likes
Even if we removed the ability to leverage up on abracadabra, anyone could fork the code and allow it if there’s demand for such a product. Unless there’s a way to code wMemo to not be usable as collateral, but I don’t believe that is a possibility. Even if it was, it would severely impact the composability of wMEMO in other protocols. We need to offer better education when it comes to leverage.
3 Likes
It’s not about leverage.
The idea that a person can have between 25% and 50% leverage below backing & there be a 50% dip is ridiculous.
In my honest opinion I think wMEMO should be removed from being used as collateral as this only brings risks of liquidation cascade which then have to be prevented with the treasury (money which can be used for better things rather than preventing liquidation cascade).
If people want to borrow they should go to a bank and borrow there, but not against wMEMO as that only brings problems.
1 Like
I agree. But Wonderland doesn’t control Abracadabra. How would this even be possible?
Why do people act like leverage is the enemy? I don’t get it. It’s been a financial instrument since the beginning. Long before crypto.
It’s ignorant to say if you leverage. It’s bad.
Leverage allows a person to hold this token & still be able to use that capital.
Without these same people holding the token. The coin wouldn’t be what it is.
The issue is the backing price. I understand not backing at backing. But 50% below backing is ridiculous. At that point there isn’t a point of backing. Just say there is no backing.
But guess what? People not gonna invest. Why invest here as opposed to anywhere else?
The apy & the backing at this point kinda seems like a scam.
You can argue all you want however. It’s advertised. So obviously these tactics were employed to attract.
I think one main issue is people feel Dani presents himself as a man of the people. But the frogs then attack those people when they get the chance. I can guarantee you this won’t benefit the community in the long run.
I agree it should changed to only allow 50% and a way to force paybacks before liquidations happen
Like at 20% the protocol starts notify you and at 5% it fills a open position it opened for you when you were at 15%
Yes, I agree with restricting leveraging for wMemo collateral to lowest level possible like 25%. Not completely disable as it will distract people even more. Please submit the topic as [RFC] with goal [WIP] exectution.
It’s unfortunate that people think a small-cap, volatile crypto asset can’t drop below backing or that the backing itself won’t drop considerably. Hell, this can even happen to a lesser extent on traditional assets. The team has mentioned for a while now that it’s not automatic buys and even gave a reason as to why. I feel sorry for people who got liquidated. It’s unfortunate, but it’s always been on us. We’re about as far out on the risk curve as you can get in a market-wide downturn and as such, it was always a realistic possibility.
Already gone so I guess you got it,
Ngl, I’m not clued up on a lot of things but if you gave me close to 1 billion dollars. I’ll make us all money. Won’t necessarily make you rich but wouldn’t of pissed millions up the wall. Could of just bought eth and btc with it 
would maybe of locked people in to avoid mass panic sellouts. Could of been laughing.
We should let people who are leveraged fail.
No more buy backs with the treasury. With a free floating price there won’t be the same incentive to dump the price.
Leveraged people have cost normal stakers a lot of money.
Greedy mofos… encouraged from the top. S**t rolls downhill
1 Like
I saw someone talking about that bots are pushing the price of $wMEMO down to take liquidation fees from the wmemo cauldron on MIM_Spell, shouldn’t we just shut down that cauldron temporarily? Maybe it would reduce the incentive to push the price down like this and give Daniele and Sifu and the team more time.
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.