Yes absolutely good point Lady Q, I don’t see why we should be compromised when we are your investors, I could be earning interest off my money in other avenues while waiting for your process to complete.
Yes totally agree! Lets get some movement happening.
I am a little concerned that voting has opened, but we have only just started a discussion about our concerns over this proposal. We have waited a few weeks, proposal is up… hardly anytime for discussion and then you are putting this to a vote already. You have called this an initial draft proposal, which would indicate there would be time to modify this prior putting it out for voting.
2 Likes
Btw, not every LP has veDFX and only veDFX token holder can vote and the veDFX only rule out from Oct! I think it is unfair for using a newly created governmence token to vote on this big hack event.
2 Likes
Space is moving quite fast; the sooner we are dealt with this, the better.
The model that is proposed is, in my view best possible solution. We can talk as much as we want, but the fact remains that the protocol is down, and it has to restart. Recovered funds will be redistributed back to LP’s, and debtDFX will be created to recoup losses; what else do you WANT? Being angry is not productive, but it is understandable, so to stay strong. The team has your best INTREST.
1 Like
I think the team can do better which means that they should compensate LP from their treasury as much as possible instead of just issuing the debt token. Understand that they need some fund for core team to operate, but I believe the rest part of the treasury should be used to compensate the LPs.
1 Like
To be fair, the debtDFX and the ‘recovered funds’ are both part of the same exploit and recovery plan. So having everything dispersed (all recovered funds & debt tokens) in one setting not only makes sense from what we had planned but also from a cost effective stand point (Gas). So we are executing with the plan that was in place, that is all.
This was the initial and no one objected outside of a tax contract that would require more time which equals delays and doesn’t effect the majority of users. This proposal has been up since the 25th and had very few responses. However, once it was put up for an official vote, that’s when more people came here to talk about it but at that point, it was already in motion.
You need to appreciate that people are busy, have jobs, lives other investments and can’t keep their eyes solely on DFX 100% of the time. This proposal (draft) has not been live for even 1 week and the voting now live, is only for a few days. It seems natural that Lps are going to have questions as there remains no real conclusive answers on whether each pool will be treated individually in regards to the looses incurred. There are many items not clear, therefore further discourse is required.
2 Likes
Yes absolutely they were part of the same exploit, I do not contest that. My issue is that LP funds have been partially recovered (weeks ago) and those (IMO) should have been returned to the owners without delay. Voting on this element seems somewhat ridiculous considering they are not DAO or DFX owned, DFX have no entitlement to these tokens.
You guys have openly stated that the number of affected LPs is not large and therefore shouldn’t be much of an expense to perform 2 airdops.
You state ‘‘so we are executing with the plan that was in place, that is all’’ - this seems highly presumptuous and somewhat contradictory to the pending voting process. Can you please elaborate, i.e. is there any point in voting, if this is already conclusively decided?
2 Likes
You should return recovered funds immediately. The stupid debt token can wait. There are a few people in here that have raised some very legitimate concerns and issues with this voting process and the way you have dealt with this hack. When dealing with user funds they are user funds! Not DFX’s not a DAO’s so return them and suck up the gas costs. Delaying this process just makes users angry and users are what DFX needs to survive.
4 Likes
I wonder though… Those that were hacked are without the benefit of the DFX reward during the period of monetising the debt token. Will you be providing some opportunity cost benefit?
Sorry if you have already covered this
1 Like
Yes this has been the case for us, didn’t even realise proposal was up at the time.
I agree that DFX treasury should be used in this case, it would be great to align incentives of the team to get a full recovery of debt token value.
One change I would suggest is that not 100% of the treasury is used because the project team would no longer have any cash left to continue building out the protocol. Once the treasury value is disclosed, there can be more discussion on the appropriate proportion.
That’s 100% understandable and agree with you but most are posting for the first time ever. I also want to add, people voted to reduce the time from 7 to 3 days (DIP-12). Both forum discussions and voting. Core actually wanted longer then 3 days but the DAO voted in favor.
I am strongly opposed to that plan, why (non-exhaustive list):
It will create a hyper speculative token trying to reduce the total real debt at the global expense of affected LPers while creating an inequality between them by turning this compensation into a form of gambling, clearing the team of any responsability after that when they are the 1st responsible of this fiasco.
There is no assurance that the buyback will continue during the very long period that will be necessary to the total refunding.
It will taint the project during long years with endless discussions.