210 похожих чатов

For anyone here waiting in limbo , considering withdrawing after

ILP is restored at whatever point...

If the foundation said that they would 100% make everyone whole again should any other issues arise

Would you still withdraw? Or would you consider staying in your LP position given the fact that the foundation gave assurance that they would step in?

7 ответов

17 просмотров

If guarantee is 100% of my initial tokens back that I put in 1,5 year ago then I would stay. Of course need a time limit. But if that would be within 1 year, I would sign for it now.

Jindo- Автор вопроса
Rudy
If guarantee is 100% of my initial tokens back tha...

I'd like to hear a response from everyone else here. Perhaps make a poll or something then share this info with the team & foundation

The problem is how could we trust them? They already said 100% guaranteed ILP and look what happened. Current leadership appears to be mostly marketing specialists who are really great at making promises. Would you accept another promise from the people who dug us into this hole?

Jindo- Автор вопроса
basedKeeper
The problem is how could we trust them? They alrea...

If we see the current size of their warchest and if it's more than enough to do the job, then yes I would trust them I told the team to shut down ILP since bnt was at $1.00 .. not permanently but until this matter is resolved. They did the right thing by turning it off otherwise we could have been in a worse situation

basedKeeper
The problem is how could we trust them? They alrea...

No. After 4 weeks it’s still if this and hypotheticals. Like Mark said himself the only certainties are ‘death and taxes’ So many things have to align for bancor to have a chance of success the likeliness is low

basedKeeper
The problem is how could we trust them? They alrea...

DeFi protocols and blockchains get hacked and suffer economic flaws. It is the reality of the brand new space we’re in. In some cases, you lose 100% of funds. Do you ever trust them again? Some people don’t, some do. Many of these projects survive and become more antifragile. Same could be the case here with Bancor. In this case we didn’t lose 100% of funds. The DAO signers had the knowledge and tools to quickly pause things before everyone lost everything and now fixes are being built in the open in governance and in some cases the deficit is improving and plans are forming to restore these deficits. For me that is reason to stick around and ride this one out. Most people in here who speak about “broken promises” are probably new to DeFi and don’t realize that there are no “promises” or guarantees in DeFi, there are just smart contracts. It is one big experiment. You take risk for the returns, and sometimes things go wrong. Maker said they have a decentralized stablecoin, but on Black Thursday users were liquidated by arbs in an unforeseen way. Did they break their promise? Who specifically broke a “promise”? There was no recourse for those users, a failed lawsuit, and the project survived to today. It is not the obligation of any foundation or central group to refund your money. If the success of Bancor protocol rested on a single group that would make BNT a security and the protocol illegal in the eyes of regulators.

They need to 1) show a complete 180 degree change in attitude (currently they don't believe in this approach whatsoever) 2) show a massive treasury that can absorb these kind of shocks and still continue operating 3) have these promises in ironclad writing or locked in some smart contract that can only be changed by a dao vote that gives LPs ample time to get out if emergency fund removed.

Похожие вопросы

Обсуждают сегодня

Карта сайта