I agree that this wrong needs to be corrected. Backing price was well above $25k and those leveraging at these levels (1-2x) were not being irresponsible.
2 Likes
My liq. was 22k. Was thinking of ringing some family members to help me deleverage and then the news of Sifu and refusal to buy back liqudated me. I honestly do not feel I was greedy or stupid for doing this. I honestly feel it was Danielās stupidity that liqudated me.
1 Like
For my part, the following are super important. IF this passes:
1 - the only addresses that should be allowed to claim from the treasury are the ones that were elegable to participate in the vote. This stops people from buying back in at a discount and then selling for a profit just to take advantage of this sale.
2 - claims should be paid to wMEMO holders based on a percentage of their share of the treasury based on how much wMEMO they hold REGARDLESS OF THE BACKING PRICE. Weāve always been told that wMEMO is our percentage share of the treasury. It concerns me if the backing price is based on the total supply of wMEMO then the protocol still owns the vast majority of the share. If the protocol is being shut down then itās share must be diluted. FROGS ARE THE PROTOCOL!
3 - BSGG air drop must be paid to eligible addresses
4 - The dev team, less Sifu, still getās their cut
not to mention they got loans they received something already. they lost collateral for not paying and it tanked price. its kinda their fault it tanked so fast yet the walked away with the loan. They didnt lose all of there money most who had loans better off than people who didnt
This is a terrible and lazy solution. It could be worked out who held the dips, who was the most loyal to daniel, people who bought in novemember and earlier. This could all be worked out. To much work for that lazy glutton Dani who just wants to smoke, eat junk food and fish. On OUR DIME.
2 Likes
You had to know liquidation was possible. You chose to leverage. Why is it someone elseās fault?
1 Like
I am not ok with people being paid for their liquidation from the treasury. But if people who were liquidated were paid out of Danieleās and Sifuās pockets, I would be ok with it.
Ok, I am editing this because since I am a new user I canāt submit another reply.
GUYSSS THIS IS MADNESS!!! There are too many people submitting request. We need to select representatives or someone needs to comb through all of these comments and bring together the most important arguments from various positions in the most coherent manner. We also need to compromise on certain points. For example: Many people feel as though they should get the money that they lost from being liquidated under the backed price at the time because of the promise Dani and Sifu made to them. This is valid BUT it was NOT VOTED by the DAO so, in my opinion, it should not come out of treasuryā¦but I feel their anger. SO what we can do is submit a proposal of HAVING THE TREASURY SUPPORT THOSE WHO HODL and HAVE Sifu and Daniele pay back the people who got liquidated under the backing price at the timeā¦ OUT OF THEIR OWN POCKETSā¦ See compromise!!!
4 Likes
Leveraging brings risk for greater return. Those leveraging know this. Backing price or not you put your $ at risk willing.
1 Like
I was promised there was a backing price.
The leaders of the project leveraged and advertised their positions.
I was lead to believe it was safe.
I have sifu in writing telling me that backing price will be defended, that they āwill not miss thisā, that he will ādrive to Daniās house if I have toā
2 Likes
Bro the price was $45.000 I watching it all day. My liquidation price was $30,000 the first time and 22,000 the second time Just leave the room to eat dinner and I come back to zero.
People that are made are mad because the time it happened a few weeks ago. That was real leveraged market. You couldnāt even get MIMs to borrow. Check the analytics on abracadabra
What happen this week was something that could have been prevented. Donāt blame this on leveraged investors. Our coins where locked! we were not swing trading
1 Like
IMHO the only option is to liquidate the treasury but not in the way describe. A professional needs to be hired, put in charge, and liquidate things in an orderly manner.
And all the people claiming āIām xyz, I have the CFO of the largest PE firm to helpā need to be avoided. Anyone trying to step in like this are just looking to walk off with the treasury or are some desk jockey who thinks they can be a hero to the people but its all in their head. Iād rather wire the treasury to Sifuās wallet and trust him to distribute it before I voted to put one of the randos who have come out claiming they can right the ship in charge.
Also, all the people who said we thought buybacks happen automatically did not thoughly research what they signed up for. Regardless of what Dani or Sifu said, no Ohm fork has automatic buybacks.
3 Likes
They advertised backing constantly. I thought the danger was underlying assets falling in value, which wouldnāt happen too much because sifu was such a good treasurer. I also thought there would be a slight delay in buy back which is why I put my price at less than half liq. 22k when backing was 60k. Didnāt think sifu would be unconcious for a good 8 hours. Iāll admit I thought it was a smart contract that managed it. Iām still gobsmacked at their stupitidy if this wasnāt planned / evil cunning if it was planned
3 Likes
I would rather the treasury sit idle in stablecoins or even whatever it is holding onto now while we search for new management than refund everyone. Weāve accumulated a powerful treasury and I think it is worth the fight to hang onto it.
Iāve lost plenty of money so far on this project. Happy to continue losing in the short to medium term if thatās what it takes. This was always meant to be a long-term project. My time horizon has not changed and neither should anyone elses! WAGMI
2 Likes
Even when Dani had AMA the day after it. He said the treasury buy backs been activated so it shouldnāt happen again. I had just lost $30,000 the night before. I went bought more to ride with price back up. To be liquidated again a day later. For another 40% swing in minutes
1 Like
underlying assets the whole markets been crashing my dude and people left money leveraged and want bailout nah.
1 Like
The decision to wind down Wonderland should be based on economic considerations of the value of the treasury now to investors compared to estimates of returns going forward should the fund be kept whole and managed. However, certain issues need to be addressed before confidence to vote against dissolution can be achieved.
-
There appears to have been massive manipulation of TIME and wMEMO, leading to mass liquidations, caused in part by poor communication concerning the buyback process. The promise of treasury buyback is essentially a massive buy wall, and a price target below which there is guaranteed profit. Was an attack not foreseeable then? Why was the buyback procedure not in place when the second round of liquidations occurred? This is the only question of concern that I have regarding the Wonderland team as thereās no way to know if internal collusion was involved. The possibility of internal collusion preventing buybacks coordinated with an externally triggered sell-off and liquidation cascade is too serious to ignore. I consider an investigation and a clear statement from the team on this matter to be crucial to maintaining the fund. If this can not be conclusively settled by the Wonderland team, the DAO should seek out a third-party investigation, whether that involves some kind of legal action or what have you.
-
A decision on whether to remove Sifu as treasury manager will soon be reached through a vote by the DAO. This is already conclusive and Sifu will be removed. A new treasury management structure will need to be adopted and positions filled.
-
Likewise the management or corporate structure has been inadequate. The crypto market is 24/7 and therefore so the fundās management team must be also. Liquidations could have been avoided had there been someone on watch (this in fact is an additional internal failure, at best simply bad timing, that contributed to the last round of liquidations, adding weight to the need for transparent communication and a conclusive understanding by the DAO of what happened).
-
There must be adequate safeguards put in place or otherwise adaptations to the structure of the fund to ensure that attacks or attempts to manipulate the price of TIME/wMEMO can not have the same effect seen lately.
-
The decision of whether or not to dissolve the fund should be based on promise of return to investors. An estimate of the current value of the fund to investors should be presented along with a prediction or forecast of performance and returns going forward.
-
Even if intentional wrongdoing within the team was revealed, this would only give cause to address the position and responsibilities of those members. The decision to dissolve the treasury should be based on economics and return to investors, and doesnāt need to concern the history or reputation of its management.
In summary, I feel the following items are necessary to vote against dissolution:
-
a clear, transparent and auditable report from leadership team describing in full the events contributing to the liquidations occuring on 26th Jan, addressing in detail the issue of why the buyback safeguard was not in place, what caused the price of TIME/wMEMO to crash when it did, why this type of attack was not anticipated, and what steps are required to ensure it can not happen again.
-
a decision on the structure of treasury management and how this role will be filled e.g in consultation with the DAO or by appointment, etc
-
an updated corporate management structure and plans to fill any additional or unoccupied positions if required and an updated statement regarding the conditions of remuneration for each member.
-
a statement containing an estimate of the current value of the fund to investors, and a prediction or forecast of the performance of the fund and what return this will provide to investors going forward.
In conclusion, I have concerns which I would want addressed before I casted my vote against treasury dissolution. That said, I have a great deal of confidence in the leadership team behind Wonderland and fully support their statements of intent. I would much rather contribute to the development of the Wonderland DAO and continue to be part of the movement, than cut and run and wonder what might have been.
4 Likes
yes, sure ! just for you! If this passes or even if not is the END!
āwe would not feel confident to delegate the whole treasury to a non-structured replacement.ā
EXACTLY.
This project has way too much negative attention on socials to ever be recovered.
1 Like
leave the team in place without bad actor. If you were liquidated that sucks. You signed that loan. if it had gone the other way and i said its not fair you made more money I want what you madeā¦
3 Likes
Also No unknown personnel on the board, must have bios and actual photos of team.
1 Like