To put another way, Ragequit makes profit for those that will stay. Why don’t holders want that? If you don’t that’s fine, but why not? That’s the whole point right? And if you can take money off the ragequitters, all the better?
Appreciate there is no trust of ‘whales’ but if anyone thinks I’m wrong please tell me. Far as I see this is free money for HODLers, a start to make more money…
3 Likes
“NO” to the rage quit option
2 Likes
dude, you simply can´t hold MEMO for like 3 months without the number increasing.
You´re prolly holding time or wMEMO
how is emptying the treasury profiting anyone other than the one who empties it?
3 Likes
even if they had wMEMO it still has rebases (wMEMO x current index)
I fully agree. of course YES!!!
This proposal is the very realistic one.
I liked “The professor’s proposal”, but too difficult to code.
We must move forward if our treasury decreased.
New REVENUE SHARE model will bring BIG FUTURE to our frog nation.
Gilgamesh.
4 Likes
The total I listed is total with rebases…I started with .5354 now at 2.412 MEMO, to be exact
3 Likes
Could be. For some reasons not mentioned in the proposal.
If all tokens from quitters are burned, the price will rocket. We will have a treasury but don’t know how much. Some tokens from treasury not included.
If all quitters wallets are blacklisted.
A lot of things. But we don’t know if it’s actually only what is written above. And I think it’s a little bad.
1 Like
Absolutely yes to rage quit !
4 Likes
What is to difficult to code?
The WL team needs to go more into detail. Why do we have to make guesses about what they potentially meant?
@WonderlandTeam
1 Like
Please consider guys, if we vote no, the price won’t recover to backing possibly for years. ‘Whales’ will be patient and sell when they feel is a good time. ‘Whales’ probably don’t need to withdraw to pay the bills, and can sit and benefit from WL farming etc. ‘Whales’ might be considered the enemy but they are also holders. This is a way to lose ‘the enemy’.
Also consider the opportunity - holders profit from BSGG, significantly if many ragequit.
Whatever happens best of luck to all holders, Dani and even Sifu. Big mistakes made, BUT also the most amazing building and creation too - It’s been an interesting one!
2 Likes
Here is the truth and all you need to know about the “rage quit”. The whales that were in the project already left long ago, they were the first to leave because they had advanced knowledge of Sifu. Those that were liquidated are already gone, those that sold the bottom are already gone; so who are left that want out so bad? Who are left are the vultures “not whales” vultures that got stuck when the vote to liquidate the treasury failed. They are stuck because their is no liquidity at the price level they need in order to exit with profit. No one is presently buying Wmemo at 32K range and their is presently no backing - so they are stuck.
How they get “unstuck” is with rage quit. Using the treasury as their liquidity to exit at a profit range is what they are trying to do. Understand this in totality because that is exactly what is occuring. Rage quitting will not help long holders, and it wont hurt long holders - if the rage quit tokens are burned along with the liquidated tokens.
If the vultures that want rage quit lose and sell, they are taking a loss so they wont sell now, they will wait until they are profitable and sell, but they will sell whether rage quit or value retracement to a range where their is buying for them to exit.
Again, the only thing rage quitting will do is give the vultures who lost the treasury liquidation vote access to treasury liquidity in order to exit - thats it. It will not help you, it may not hurt you. But whether they leave now or later makes zero difference except they get to suck on our treasury as the source of liquidity to exit.
10 Likes
It’s a hidden Easter egg for real Frogs. 
Maby there is something. Maby not. 
We can write a proposal as the DAO to support backing. We have that power its not a Dani choice.
not quite, it will help long term holders as they get a larger portion of the overall, because BSGG is not shared with quitters
1 Like
I suppose Treaury buy-backs actually achieve the exact same result:
They buy below backing, meaning long term-holders slightly benefit each time, the more it happens the more they benefit.
Same as ragequit excluding BSGG. Long term holders benefit here too.
Seems buybacks are more popular, but they achieve the same thing.
Should only buyback BELOW backing though, otherwise, long term holders don’t benefit.
I’m cool with either, achieve the same result…
3 Likes
Yes, that is why I stated that this vote will not help you and it may not hurt you either. I dont see the rage quit as a double negative or a positive/negative - its a neutral event.
3 Likes
I think the 1st_Professor’s proposal was to control the price of wMEMO without using treasury, “burn tokens to increase the price well above backing”. i think difficult to control it.
I think they are quite similiar, but perhaps what would be good is to make it slightly more appealing to holders. The BSGG exclusion is already big benefit but maybe someother steps help. Let’s see…