I’m 100% in support of this proposal, lets get it done so the project can finally move on. Without this I don’t think the price will ever be able to organically get back to backing let alone a premium ever. The longer we trade at a discount to RFV the risk of a hostile takeover of some sort increases and these holders accumulating will vote to potentially wind down the project completely in the future or sabotage the project to their benefit. Let’s get rid of them.
I think that for the RQers giving up their share of BSGG and the extra 5-10% slippage is fair and will have big upside to those that stay. Those against this are either blinded by rage that some short term holders might make a little money, even if it helps them increasing their share of the treasury and increasing the backing per wMEMO. Or they simply are too small brain to understand how this proposal helps them, from the comments it appears a lot of ppl fall under this category.
Even if there is a huge price tank because of rage quitters, the treasure will still be strong and at that point long holders can DCA and new holders that believe in the power of the treasure and ability to utilize it to grow the project. This would be a natural refresh of supporters.
#1 no: unless the window used for the whitelist is limited to the avax blocks just before danni’s liquidation and way before wind down vote announcement.
#2 no: where in this WIP does it state burning tokens? if rage quit option is to be on the table i would expect that to be in bold lettering, not as an assumption.
#3 no: none of this prevent the people who are rage quitting from buying back in right after taking a 20/30k+ above market price buyout? i see this as a highly likely outcome as its smart trading.
unless #1 is tightly constrained to those who actually should have a rage quit option, number #3 presents more ceilings/market tops in the long run
. . . . “The snapshot vote will be posted as WIP #5.1 with the option to implement rage quit or not.”
Voting Options:
Yes, Offer a Rage Quit Option
No, do not implement Rage Quit
The voting results of WIP #5.1 will determine if we move forward with the Rage Quit option, which would naturally move us into the #5.2 stage. . . .“Rage Quit Whitelist”
"wMEMO holders who wish to exit. . . . .and receive their part of the treasury will need to vote YES on this snapshot.
Snapshot Vote Duration:
4 Days
“If you would like to participate in the RageQuit you need to enter the whitelist by voting YES on this snapshot page.” (Within the 4 days snapshot window once it’s been posted)
Voting Options:
YES, add me to the whitelist
NO, I do not want to participate in the Rage Quit
“The multisig will get the treasury ready and will start the rage quit process within 48 hours from the ending of the whitelist snapshot vote.”
Meaning, it will take 48 hours from the end of voting to launch the next phase where you will be able to ‘claim’ your share of the treasury.
You will have 72 hours (3 days) to claim your share.
Please correct me if any of this summary in not accurate.
Thanks.
hehe, this guy is probably another whale stuck not able to make quick arb last time.
Dude, whales causes protocol to fail. They have the power. I know they probably pay you to simp on them but please do not try to convince others that whales do not have the power to kill any protocol.
Whales does not stay on one protocol. They pump and dump token to make quick buck. Even if there are whales in Wonderland now to “so-called float the price, haha”, its because they are stuck, not because they are nice.
A little money??? you f’kin kidding me right? a whale bought 10million WMEMO token a week ago can quit now with 40million worth of treasury share is a little money??? and I bet there’s more than 4 whales stuck in wonderland currently. We are not blinded. We just simply hate whales who keeps profitting from little honest people like so many of us.
Another one trying to spin "“uuu… arbitrage is good”. Good for the whales, that is. You think the whales who are stuck with us now going to “join us” again after stucked for many weeks here? Nope, let them sell at free market price. If there’s no snapshot before SifuGate, this rage quit is clearly to benefit whales who bought millions of WMEMO last week. NO GO.
Your maths is top shit. The biggest whale bought an average of 30k, making it a 20% « arb » and it isn’t an arb given all the risk. Nobody could buy 10m worth of wmemo at 18k and even so that would be 20m now with the ragequit, not 40… I mean come on.
Just do the maths now
Backing is 35-38k exclusing BSGG
That means the real backing is higher than 45k
If 20% of tokens ragequit, that brings the backing to 55k+ for the remaining holders (because of bsgg)
That means, i will be staying in WL with more value to my tokens after ragequits.
Of course the wmemo from ragequitters are burned!! (They go to the treasury, same)
Why do you guys keep hating on whales or shit? Nothing is free, the risk they take here is huge and without that wmemo would be 15k or less now. Project has been tainted, just. accept it.
I am voting YES for ragequit, if you vote NO you just hate your money. Let them go, frogs united
do you really think it is a quick buck? is scam the right word to use here? Is there something about this treasury that makes it "yours’ in particular apart from the fact that you own tokens just like the rest of us?
We are doing nothing to improve the finance of the DAO. There are unfinished things not done such as continuing the yield farm exercises, liquid staking, etc.
We are not doing anything to improve the reputation and efficiency of the DAO (especially after sifu left).
It has nothing to do with “stucked” holders. If they want out. just sell. I believe this proposal intentionally made a little complicated so that we overlook the fact they “forgot” to include snapshot before sifuGate.
hahaha your math are top shit as well. Alright. Let’s go. Lets vote and see who has the most common sense. Admin, let’s put it up the snapshot poll please.
I supported the Professors rage quit option simply because it was thoughtfully laid out and appropriated.
This proposal feels like it’s being used as a bandade for a wound that needs stitches.
The plus side is we rip the bandade off and get moving faster.
The negative side is dragging this out for too long with half thought out WIPs’.
I’m still on the fence with this proposal.
Great summary, i find it hard to disagree, likely because you state many facts that cannot be denied. We need to all be vigilant on assuring our future with new proposals for how to revenue share as well.
Im neutral on the RQ, you have shown me more win for long term holders with this message. But this upside only comes if it is clarified that immediately after the buyback that these tokens will infact be burned.
Then later as a second infusion we burn the liquidated tokens.
