It would be great to see the amount of investors who levered responsibly and still remain vs the amount who borrowed to excess and were flushed.
1 Like
This just isnât true. And again, this is not a leverage argument. Youve missed the point completely.
Umm. Yes, table saws are extremely dangerous compared to a hand saw. Good luck in your uninteresting life. Youâll remember this on your deathbed (hopefully many many many years from now). Youâll remember how some guy from far away on the internet could identify how uninteresting and risk-averse you are, and how you wish you had done more with your life. Starting with; understanding that this isnât about Leverage!! Never was!! Itâs an argument about the moral responsibility of the DAO founder!!
100% why should i pay for a risk i didnt take!!?
2 Likes
If @Sifu and the management of Wonderland have strong conviction that they will buy back when price of wMemo is below backing, then there is no reason to liquidate any position that is below backing because the price of wMemo will go back to backing after buy back.
Anyway, this is a battle where the liquidated frogs are destined to lose because if this proposal went to DAO vote, our vote will not carry much weight since most of our position had been liquidated.
1 Like
Can somebody please explain what the Time stakers supposed to do? Can we still keep it staked or do we need to unstake and migrate to sushi? No clear guidance has been provided!
The difference is that Sifu isnât proposing he repay himself from treasury funds.
You would be in a better spot if Sifu had done what he said he was going to do in the first place!
This isnât about risk tolerance or leverage, itâs about righting the wrong, did by the lie to the investors, that the treasury was to dam impending cascades. It wasnât. Thatâs it. Nothing else to argue about. You shouldnât have to pay. And if you just thought about it for one second, youâd be on my side of this argument. WE (leveragers) took all the risk for you (non leveragers) in order to increase price and drive up the treasury in the first place. And thatâs completely beside the point anyway.
Well, if anything he should be paying. He created the lie in which caused the cascade. If he didnât say, âdont worry, your investment is safe, donât deleverage, we will take care of price action with the treasury moneyâ (paraphrasing, obviously). Then we would have been business as usual, and sold our tokens (or at least deleveraged properly) instead of getting Liquidated completely based on his claims.
Although 0xSifu got liquidated does anyone know how Dani himself avoided liquidation? wMEMO traded below his liquidation price for a few minutes O_o and the liquidator never touched his $20M loan
You canât simultaneously acknowledge that borrowing is risky, and then say that people with a CDP shouldnât have been liquidated because the treasury funds should be used to guarantee that doesnât happen. If its the case that the treasury funds should be used to GUARANTEE you wonât be liquidated below the backing, the borrowing/leveraging should be built into the project and automatically applied to everyoneâs wonderland position. Otherwise, risk averse people who donât leverage are losing out to those that choose to leverage.
Borrowers CHOSE to take extra risks, and were liquidated. I CHOSE not to take those risks, and didnât get liquidated. There is no reason why my share of the market cap should have its value decreased to pay back those who exposed themselves to more risk than I did.
There are multiple messages from Sifu confirming that the price could go below backing before manual buybacks occurred. Users assuming that the price couldnât go so far below backing is on them, and not anyone else. Sifu said buybacks would occur to increase the price to the backing, and they did.
âWe buy back if it ever reaches backing price. It can go lower if panic users irresponsibly dump below that number before we have a chance to execute buybacks.â
âReasonably safe. Market could dip before buyback during a black swan event, extremely unlikely.â
3 Likes
The price dropping below your liquidation price flags you for liquidation, it doesnât liquidate you. If you can deleverage your position before the bots get to you, you are safe
It did. Nothing to argue, you knew it wasnât automatic anything you lose is not something i should pay for. Maybe that liq shouldve been 50% below backing instead, just a suggestion.
1 Like
Wonderland buys the Liquidated tokens, spell gets the interest Sifu/Dani are fine. No sweat off their brows. This all happened in their ecosystem. Probably better off for it (based on no evidence , just anger)
Letâs just say I think people should take another look at it because he didnât bring his loan into good standing
âWell, if anything he should be payingâ Well thatâs not what this is proposing. If it were, those voting no would likely have a different opinion.
Ah yes, anger. The best tool for attempting to justify your viewpoint as logical. Would you prefer that the wonderland team didnât have bots in place for liquidations, so we experiences an even worse liquidation cascade? Because thatâs what would happen. Bots would liquidate and then dump the TIME onto the market, crashing the price.
There is absolutely no way these should be paid back unless they lock these funds for a minimum of 6 months.
It was well below âbackingâ AND Sifuâs safe suggestion (based on him running the treasury and specifically saying he can prevent it).
And you shouldnât have to pay anything, i fully agree!! Why would you think, that I think you should pay?
It would come out of the treasury, and your token may be worth a bit less (very minimal compared to the last 3 months) for a short amount of time, but you would also gain millions of dollars worth of happy investors on your side. So it would negate the small delay in price, if any. .
Especially since âapparentlyâ the treasury wasnât affected.
You could have prepared and do all those needed transactions in advance when you put your wMEMO as collateral.