Proposal - Offer Rage Quit Before Other Decisions Are Made

Hello frogs

Over the past few days Wonderland has been deeply stress tested and without buybacks many holders are stuck, unable to get the backing they were promised for their holdings

Price action shows that both long term holders and newer entrants are afraid for the future and continue to sell off their wMEMO into the AMM, even though the backing price is significantly higher

From the recent unwind vote we have seen that 40% of holders are not aligned for the long term of the project. Therefore, if the coming days are spent voting on a future for Wonderland, these holders will vote for short term success, and won’t care about nuances of who runs the treasury, how yield is earned, etc. These holders need to be flushed out fairly.

We should clear out those that want their backing, while delivering extra value to those that are aligned for the long term.

I propose that before any long term decisions are made a Rage Quit process happens where:

  • all trading is halted
  • all liquidity is removed
  • calculate the backing per WMEMO (using the math described in this tweet, less BSGG): https://twitter.com/dcfgod/status/1470499199179493378
  • create a rage quit pool of MIM so no assets need to be sold off. Rage quitters can claim from this MIM pool.
  • If the pool runs out then assets should be sold for more MIM to refill the pool until the rage quit window closes
  • The rage quit window should be 48h
  • During this window any user can come burn their WMEMO via a UI forever and get the underlying MIM which backs it
  • I am happy to work with whoever to get an exact calculation of what the backing is in a transparent manner - it’s just that there are so many wallets that I feel uncomfortable calculating it myself now without help from the team directly. My first guess is it is upwards of $33k / WMEMO

This is beneficial for long term holders because:

  • Those that leave will get no BSGG airdrop, increasing the size of the airdrop for everyone who stays
  • There is an increase of backing per WMEMO for those that stay as 100% of the BSGG holdings are not counted towards RFV. This is almost $100M of extra value (last I checked) for those that stay.
  • Those that want out will have a safe way to leave the community, clearing sellers and only keeping long term aligned holders.
  • For a case study take a look at how this went for constitution DAO. Those that stayed made multiples more than those that left for their eth backing value.

For those that fear this is negative as it shrinks the treasury - they are correct that the treasury gets smaller, but the backing for each holder that stays goes up. Having a massive treasury has never been a competitive advantage to the project. Regardless of size every investment and strategy up to this point could’ve happened, and will continue to happen.

96 Likes

seems about right - I calculated treasury would shrink by roughly 50M if every single person who voted for unwinding were to redeem - wonderland can easily fund a 50M-100M and refill if it runs out

13 Likes

This is 100% the right first step in steadying the ship. At the moment, the other proposals are grand schemes which have very little in the way of immediate actionable advice to stop the bleed and help WL holders.

Everyone hates whales, but they aren’t driving the price down. It’s holders like us who are selling every rebase and throwing in the towel at 50% of what our savings are worth.

16 Likes

This is 100% a great start

As DCF said, many holders that want to exit will simply vote for short term results unless they are able to leave at a fair backing price.

Halting liquidity and removing any holders who do not want to stay will A) protect the price from whales trying to take advantage & B) help the project’s overall sentiment and community in the short term and long term.

Once we have the true long term holders, we can move forward with our future and new management team

16 Likes

The BSGG position is not liquid enough to have any real value and should not be counted towards anything imo.

I think having a ragequit penalty of 5% or so would be a interesting option. That way people that ragequit get a way out and people that want to stay get a bigger share of the treasury.

9 Likes

agree 100% to this proposel

10 Likes

100% agree. If something isnt done asap, price will continue to bleed

8 Likes

5% ragequit penalty unfair. you do want them to quit no?

2 Likes

I fully support this proposal. It benefits both those who just want a fair exit, and it benefits those who want to stay.

It appears it could take a lengthy amount of time for the other proposals to get through to a vote and passed, the best option is going to likely be a blend of multiple proposals and will require multiple re-edits each requiring time for comment and will likely take weeks, leaving a great deal of uncertainty around the project and downward price pressure in the meantime.

6 Likes

I don’t think it’s unfair at all. You want to give holders a good reason to accept shrinking the treasury, and that reason is higher rfv.

Dcfgod was proposing doing so through BSGG, I don’t think BSGG is liquid enough to be worth anything. So the best way to do it having a small ragequit penalty.

1 Like

this is fantastic. i personally was against rage quitting but its the best thing to do as of right now. this is definately beneficial for everyone. the best part is the burning of wmemo from rage quitters this will really increase the remaining holders market share of wmemo and help bring it back up to backing price or higher asap. if we dont do this, it could take a much longer time for price to recover to somewhere where we arent 80% down.

9 Likes

i think its unfair considering that rage quitters will help burn wmemo enough that the 5% penalty wont matter. wmemo price will take much less money to rise above backing. also the treasury has done such a good job in profitable trades there will be plently left over. vc deals only need like 10 million too invest . we would have leftover treasury + bsgg after rage quit. our share in the tvl pool will increase alot which would be great when revenue share comes along.

3 Likes

This sounds good, this is the first step that should be taken before anything else. Makes us work only with people who want to be here: crucial for decisions that follow.

8 Likes

Strongly agree this is a reasonable path forward. We should prioritize

9 Likes

Burning wMEMO doesn’t matter if metrics stay the same, you switch from owning 1% of supply to owning 5% but you have the same amount of underlying assets you had before.

And yeah a smaller circulating supply is a lot easier to pump but a smaller treasury also has a lot less influence in the grand scheme of things.

1 Like

I support it. Many people still didn’t sell because Dani previously promised a rage quit, but now it has to be decided by the dao. Let people who want to get out their freedom

7 Likes

I think this is a pretty good first step we have to take. The majority of holders who wants to leave can go. After that, we can look for Wonderland 2.0.

2 Likes

yes this is the problem, I was holding because he promised this and now price is 50% below backing.

4 Likes

lets go forward with this

6 Likes

I support this proposal

8 Likes