He stated that in a discord chat that nobody saw. Doesn’t really warn us huh.
Backing is different than pegged many many many times in financial history things go below the backing value and those are indeed arbitrage opportunities, it is the natural mechanism of not perfectly efficient markets.
4 Likes
Good faith? Had the price gone up and you made 10x the profits I would have made, would you act in “good faith” and redistribute?
I’m not in favor of this proposal because I knew that the price could fall below backing. Ignorance is not an excuse, and I’m sorry to sound like an asshole. But wonderland isn’t a trading platform, and it lacks the security you would get such as a stop loss mechanism, etc from proper trading platforms. The risks are apparent. Moreover, providing this type of charity sets a bad precedent that could encourage more 9,9ing, so I’d actually see the failure of this proposal as a success as it would hopefully admonish future leveragers on the risk they’re taking
7 Likes
I am in favor. I was way under backing. Either way with all the changes coming who knows if it’s worth it to invest more at these prices now.
1 Like
Still doesn’t warn us about this VERY important aspect of the backing.
Just a few more statements from Sifu about the backing price. Most notably, defining the backing price as “…The backing price is the price at which we can afford to buy every token in circulation.” This is not a promise of automatic buyback. Those in favor are conflating the backing price with a stop loss.
6 Likes
Is this on the website or twitter? Is it easily accessible to the investors who lost tens of thousands to this enormous and instant dip? We didn’t get clear info on that. Only way to know is to search on the Discord messages.
It was explicitly stated and explained in the docs…
2 Likes
It’s nobody responsibility to warn you, you are the sole responsible of your decisions. Indeed many didn’t understand what they were find and that’s sad but hopefully many will learn
2 Likes
anyone who got liq’d under backing price should be repayed their losses, everyone else knew what they were doing having that much leverage
1 Like
Then get on the discord. Who said twitter is the HQ for defi projects? It’s on you to conduct due diligence on the projects you’re investing in. That said, it’s quite apparent in the DeFi community that Discord is the defacto platform for defi project correspondence with those closest to the projects. The very nature of “IDO”s (Initial Discord Offering) is a testament to that fact. Your being under informed is not the responsibility of those who took the time to create discord accounts and we’re able to make sounder decisions.
3 Likes
I don’t think it’s right to demand your losses be offset by the treasury. Abracadabra offers amazing features but using them at all comes with a risk. I just want to address a two arguments from the pro-refund crowd that I’ve read today.
- We dipped below the backing price
Sifu has said multiple times that the process of buying back is a manual one. It makes it impossible to buy back exactly at the backing price. The initial dip from $1300 to $700 lasted less than 30 minutes before huge purchases came in, presumably the buy back.
- Sifu encouraged a near-backing price liquidation level
He is not your financial advisor. He can’t tell you which level fits you and you can’t assume you are safe because you replicate his own risk level. Sifu doesn’t control the market, he got liquidated himself which shows you he doesn’t get it right 100% of the time, he’s human like you and I.
The treasury is just not meant to be your insurance fund, imagine asking Binance for a refund on a leveraged position. A refund from the treasury would be a huge disservice to anyone who doesn’t leverage or that hasn’t been liquidated.
9 Likes
Exact same thing happened to me. Transaction wouldn’t go through on Uniswap or trying to deposit in Abra I think because of the volume
People still don’t understand the are many options to take by leadership without taking a cent out of the treasure. The problem with humanity is the inability to empathize. Since you didn’t have an opportunity to grab some mims from abra to borrow, now you virtue signal by giving lectures on leveraging and dyor. If abracadabra bank was an outside entire from Daniel Sesta empire, then perhaps nothing could be done. The reality is that it is HIS bank that baits wmemo holders to engage in leverage while his treasury brags about a liquidity price of 1100. Honestly, this is life and we are all responsible for our actions, still there is always a choice to be caring and virtuous and recognize the failings in this system. Finally, is a good businesses desicion to restore those rekt by liquidation UNDER treasury CFO bagging number. Is a call taking care of your people.
2 Likes
The interpretation of the backing price is incorrect in this proposal. As it is a manual process, requiring multi signatories, it is unreasonable to expect that it is set up to cover a quick spike down in price. It is more reasonable to consider the fact that it may take many hours to initiate, particularly considering that the signatories cover multiple time zones in various parts of the world.
If the proposal is allowed then we create an atmosphere of moral hazard, where participants are encouraged to take undue risk with their leveraged positions, thus leading to the inevitability of another cascading liquidity event, like we witnessed today.
An added concern is that investors that did not leverage, but who instead took the safer decision to simply stake, are punished by seeing their part of the treasury eroded, to compensate those who took the risk of leveraging.
I therefore vote against the proposal.
5 Likes
Where? Not the 1 TIME backed by 1MIM please.They say they have a backing price, meaning they have to back at this exact price.
Against.
Sifu said several times that the price can fall below the backing price. We have seen it happen to DAOs on every chain (Hector DAO was below backing price for weeks). It should not be the responsibility of the protocol to look after your leveraged positions.
3 Likes
That is clearly in relation to sellers and not those leveraged.
1 Like
Totally Agreed
- Project like this have their fundamental based on people trust. With what happens today that trust is trembling.
- Those people that was liquidated below backing price, was me most strong hand and loyal frogs ever exist. because they believed in Sifu word, Danielle and TIME project for a long time. Time price hit 870, far way below backing price that Sifu said they gona hold.
- Inclusive there is a lot of people that tried to repay or deleverage into this cascade liquidation, but they couldn’t because network congestion or the swap tolerance.
- Another possibility may have been to stop liquidation from the abra contract itself. I always heard Danielle saying that he work for the people no for on project or another, if the contract have this feature probably may have been stop this massacre.
I lost 6.4 wMEMO, almost everything i got. I really believe in Danielle and his team and Wonderland as VC project. I was holder for like 3 months because I trust. I just want to ask for a partial refund to try to start again with something.
Maybe can be wMEMO that you can claim every month or something like that to avoid massive sell’s again.
Probable the people that said no to this proposal are these who don’t believe, they sell before, wait to the massacre and then buy again. I really think these are no the loyal frogs that this project are looking for.
4 Likes