I agree there needs to be a payment to the fellow frogs we have a 1B+ treasury we can help out our fellow frogs to restore the trust in the community many people got rekt and this payment to everybody won’t even affect the treasury not a bit so I’m all for it and also it was stated several times that no frog had to worry about it going significantly under backing I thought they were parameters set in place to make sure we didn’t repeat the same cascade the last time and Dani and sifu should honor there word because I believe in the whole ecosystem that has been built to support wonderland in the long term
3 Likes
I’m not really for it. I guess I’m wrong, but in my reading, the backing is $1. We got a ways to go. But whatever the true case, I know leveraging is high risk. It’s to be avoided. If you assume high risk, however, you must contend with the results. To me, Wonderland itself is a high risk investment. I have not made any money whatsoever. I contend with that as this is a choice I made. My whole holiday season this year I was burned left and right to a crisp on bad choices I made, so I understand this sucks. I am feeling it from other angles. But I still see this project going somewhere, so I am still here. If we do not let this moment teach people how to assess risk properly, then we may be in trouble.
1 Like
if that’s your point of view by now then you better stay far away from digital assets, investing, smoking, drinking, hoping riches comes overnight and for what it’s worth. Trust is for lovers and family Trust is not the problem here
I voted in favor with modifications. I do think the backing price should stand for something. the trust is damaged. BUT then I thought, who got liquidated? only the ones that leveraged.
I got in time when the price was at 7000. The recent dump in price hurt me as well, however I am not liquidated. How come? because I dont leverage. If you leverage, that was your decision, dont expect your fellow frogs to pay for your greed. Nobody in this space told you to go leverage your positions. learn that greed is NOT good and that greed has consequences.
if you dont learn it here, you will learn it somewhere else. You better learn quickly before you get rekt again.
my liquidation price was set at 1050$, i was pretty sure it is safe because it was way below backing price
when price started to go around 1400, i tried to deleverage and pay dept but avax network on binance was suspended(which i realized after i bought avax)
and when i tried to use tool on abracadabra transaction would never go through
dont think its fair to all of us small degen frogs who did 9,9 and belived in backing price
2 Likes
Here was a proposal I wrote a while back in hopes of reducing liquidation risks for everyone and keeping Wonderland healthy Reduce default borrow options on Abracadabra to promote more responsible leverage
lmao no
Sifu himself got liquidated
If you leveraged and got liquidated: its your fault, not ours.
I was one of the people warning against leverage in the discord but I was always shot down by people saying its not that unsafe and its just the people who do it irresponsibly who are the problem.
We arent gonna print millions to give to the people who were dumbasses, new to crypto, and yolo’ed their shit like that. I myself have been a victim of irresponsible leverage- But we all eventually learn… the hard way.
Abracadabra isnt giving you free money.
Liquidation is inevitable.
Anime women arent real.
2 Likes
Modification I would propose is that we need to quantify how much this would impact the treasury before agreeing to it fully
3 Likes
You clearly don’t understand the argument. The argument isn’t about leverage. It’s about investors (who helped built the treasury) were told the treasury (that they endowed) would be used in this regard, and it wasn’t deployed the way it was promised. So, lay off your leverage FUD.
1 Like
The argument IS NOT about leverage. It’s about investors (who helped built the treasury) were told repeatedly that the treasury that they endowed would be used in this regard, to preserve price and specifically to solve for price cascade [but, “not automated to prevent bots”] and it wasn’t deployed the way it was promised.
1 Like
Waaah wahhh I lost money. You should refund me because I leveraged. Waaaahh I’m a baby.
4 Likes
That’s not it either. It’s a reasonable discussion if you let it be.
The argument IS NOT about leverage. It’s about investors (who helped built the treasury) were told repeatedly that the treasury that they endowed would be used in this regard, to preserve price and specifically to solve for price cascade [but, “not automated to prevent bots”] and it wasn’t deployed the way it was promised.
Me too exactly, but the argument IS NOT about leverage. It’s about investors (who helped built the treasury) were told repeatedly that the treasury that they endowed would be used in this regard, to preserve price and specifically to solve for price cascade [but, “not automated to prevent bots”] and it wasn’t deployed the way it was promised.
Your right.
I apologize.
So if I’m understanding correctly there are people who say. I was told it was basically like a net. It wouldn’t allow the price to fall below.
Others say. They understood it to mean it would buy it back. When? No clue. But the price would rise back up.
So people with the understanding of it working like a net: leveraged under that net.
And when it dipped below they were liquidated.
1 Like
Absolutely. They/We were told this repeatedly it was, and it was a huge reason for some (apparently a lot) of us to be so invested.
The argument IS NOT about leverage. It’s about investors (who helped built the treasury) were told repeatedly that the treasury that they endowed would be used in this regard, to preserve price and specifically to solve for price cascade [but, “not automated to prevent bots”] and it wasn’t deployed the way it was promised.
Hey everyone –
I was one of those liquidated in today’s event. I didn’t lose nearly as much as many of you, but it was my first time, so it was not pretty. But I figure I’ll put my thoughts out there in case they’re worth anything to anyone.
To start, I have read every comment & reply on this proposal so far, and both sides have reasonable points. While today was not my best, I did take away some valuable lessons.
This was my first leveraged position. I was leveraged below backing, but I still might have been “over” leveraged, simply due to my inexperience (perhaps it would not have been “over” for someone with more experience. For example, I only just learned from the comments that I could have repaid my position from my collateral. I even looked for that feature on Abra, but likely due to my clouded thinking, never found it. I definitely would have done that though.).
This was also a lesson, not in quantity of movement, but in rapidity. I never invest in anything without an exit plan, but this happened so fast I just couldn’t keep up. I watched the prices like a hawk starting from the minute I woke up (literally, first thing I looked at since I saw things dropping yesterday - and stayed up til 3 AM to keep an eye on it), refreshing once a minute sometimes, but just never expected things to move that quickly.
I also didn’t do this completely blind or on faith. I devoted as much time as I felt I could to research given other life factors – even in retrospect, I don’t know that I would/could have done much differently in terms of research – so using DYOR as a jab feels a little below the belt. I’m absolutely still learning where to find information, who to trust, and how things work. Totally. But for many of us who lost, even those who significantly overleveraged, we thought we had done the research. I read the docs – probably 4 or 5 times since I started staking $time in November. Each time, I learned something new, and will likely continue to. But some of the conflicting/confusing/misunderstood statements from the devs, the docs, and the community at large (devs are by no means exclusively at fault for any of this) make it difficult for those of us with less experience to wade through the gray area.
Anyway – I likely won’t vote either way on this one. I’ll obviously be happy with any recup on losses, but one of the things that attracted me to the decen space is the personal accountability factor. I got outplayed, not by another person, but by a system I didn’t completely understand or know what it was capable of, and I take responsibility for that position.
That said, please, everyone, rest assured: if we are repaid in ANY amount, I will NOT sell out or pull my investment from this project. I have incredibly high hopes for DAOs as a concept and appreciate and respect Dani’s relative transparency.
As an aside, and maybe this is for complete shit, in which case, feel free to ignore it – I wonder if there’s a way to spread the repaid losses evenly among all holders? If you got liquidated, it’s not a complete loss, and if you didn’t, you get “compensated” for any drop in price from the repayment. Just a thought. Thanks for reading everyone.
4 Likes