Can someone help me understand please?

I do disagree with how it was executed, but I do not think community funds should be used to compensate users who were in all fairness playing a relatively dangerous game considering the recommended collateral rate was 160% and the new rate was adjusted to 130%.

0

15.04.2022

Yehuda Lisker

Kristian
I do disagree with how it was executed, but I do n...

some users like my self were at 129%.... what dangerous game was I playing.

0

15.04.2022

Kristian

Yehuda Lisker
some users like my self were at 129%.... what dang...

It was indeed a dangerous game. 160% was considered the "safe" level. If some major news about Coca cola was announced it is not unreasonable to think it could (at least for a short time) spike up 17% and liquidate you. But again, I totally agree that this was handles poorly and that you should have never been liquidated due to this in the first place.

0

15.04.2022

DeFi King Автор вопроса

Kristian
I do disagree with how it was executed, but I do n...

I agree it is risky.. but i was at a relative safe collateral rate..but this oversight in communication from the team has cost alot of people alot of money and something needs to be done about it

0

15.04.2022

Kristian

DeFi King
I agree it is risky.. but i was at a relative safe...

Well, you can't really hold "the team" responsible when it comes to decentralized governance that the community have full access to. Even the websites are decentralized, so the team might not necessarily have any ways to warn users through the website (which exists basically just as a UI for the smart contracts).

0

15.04.2022

Kristian · Accepted Answer

Kristian

Governance increased the minimum collateral rate to 130% from 110%.

0

15.04.2022

209 похожих чатов

Can someone help me understand please?

9 ответов

Похожие вопросы