Yeah, Id be bummed as well if i hadnt withdrawn my rewards already, if I am going to be honest with you:) . I both agree with you, as well as with their sentiment that it wasnt “money” lost as much as “time” spent
staking. The argument that one is comparable the other can obviously be made, but still. Ultimately I think it was probably the best option.
Burning to stabilize the tokenomics to account for a technical error the Devs made is certainly not ideal, but seems like the correct difficult longterm choice as it benefits nobody if the project fails. Just my opinion though, you are of course free to yours.
I’m not, their decision actually benefited me before I pulled the very small fun stack I put in their pools, and that’s another deflection. Whether someone made a thousand dollars or lost a thousand dollars does not change the principle, what the team did and how they behaved is appalling in my opinion.
They didn’t say it was a technical error, they said “it was an oversight in thinking this community is going to attract the type of investors arbinyan did.” That’s not a tech error, that’s a basic math error, and them being too proud to own up to it. Instead of seizing the farmed rewards of the single stakers, they could have burned from the dev wallet, taking the cost of their mistake and the cost of doing what they thought was best for the community on themselves. Instead they implied the ONE single stakers were doing something wrong and used that as a justification to seize and burn their farming rewards. They insulted validators who actually provide value to the ONE ecosystem for criticizing them and implied they were just greedy and mad that they couldn’t continue to be greedy.
The community did voice their opinion the project put a vote out and it said airdrop the seized rewards back. They chose to go against what the community had voted on seen in the screenshot in this conversation above. Thats the issue. They did not act in the communities best interest.
Their narrative has been somewhat malleable on this point. You have “It’s because we copied the arbinyan without code without making any changes” and "“It was an oversight in which option the community would choose, as we thought most people would show faith in a new project” (as you can see from a screenshot I posted). Note the blame deflection on the latter explanation.
It also seems I’ve become a topic of discussion of the team lead on the Telegram. Note the same tactics used there as I outlined (with an additional bit of false equivalency sprinkled in). He’s continuing to deflect from his own mistakes by saying I’m only doing this because I’m mad. No Stefan, I just have principles. He asks why I’m not saying these things in the telegram where he can ban and mute me and continue to control the conversation surrounded by people who have a financial interest in his meme token. A question for the ages there.
Stefan, the issue is not shutting down the single staking pool. The issue is not “being mad about free money” or “missing out”. This issue is your behavior, and your shifting responsibility for your team’s mistakes onto others. I don’t even in principle disagree with the decision to shut down the ONE only pool and redeploy it at a lower emission rate, and you constantly trying to portray any criticism of you or your behavior as being angry over that, or mad about missing out is deceitful, and at this point it seems intentionally so. The issue, as I said in my initial post is your behavior after. You STOLE from people. You could have returned their staking rewards and burned dev funds for YOUR MISTAKE. You chose not to. Instead you chose to minimize the risk they took to justify what you did. You could have humbly apologized. You chose not to. You say you have to kill the pool to save the farm, ok. But then later, you gleefully say the rewards being burnt really weren’t that much and anyone mad is being unreasonable. If those rewards weren’t that much then you obviously didn’t have to burn them to save the pool after the emissions were already lowered. You getting validation from people who also benefited from your actions doesn’t make them right. You can try to paint it or justify it however you want, but that is what you did.
His narrative will continue to be “people are just mad that they can’t get unreasonable interest rates. They are just mad that they missed out.” I would normally like to believe this is a fundamental misunderstanding on your part, but at this point it seems more likely you are intentionally avoiding the point in favor of addressing strawmen you created.
What I’m doing is nothing like being mad a store won’t honor a mispriced item. That is a false equivalency. What you did is more like breaking into someone’s house after they bought something from you and stealing it back, then thinking it’s ok because you left a refund on their nightstand. You seem to not understand why that is not ok.
You started a pool with emission rates you controlled. You allowed the pool to go on with those emission rates. You decided this was unsustainable and the pool needed to be shut down. Some people might disagree with doing that, but it’s not morally wrong. Since you seem to perpetually misrepresent this, the part that isn’t ok is when you STOLE their unclaimed farming rewards and burned them. The icing on the cake of how wrong that is is that you ignored your own community poll, gaslit, silenced, and smeared anyone who disagreed or pointed it out, and justified it because YOU think they didn’t take enough risk to earn those rewards. You have proven anyone who deposits in a contract you have any involvement in is absolutely taking a massive risk.
I’m sure people who are holding Stefan’s token and have a vested interest in it’s price will rise to his defense. Some of them may genuinely disagree with me and some of them may just be concerned that my words might have an affect on the price of the token they hold (I genuinely hope it doesn’t). They will say he saved the project, and tell you how concerned he was about getting user funds back. Those things might be true, but they still do not change the improper things he and his team did that he’s continually refusing to admit were improper or take any accountability for. Is it ok to steal from your users because that’s what you think needs to be done to save your project?
When reading Stefan’s words, I encourage people to think about this quote called the Narcissist’s Prayer.
“That didn’t happen.
And if it did, it wasn’t that bad.
And if it was, that’s not a big deal.
And if it is, that’s not my fault.
And if it was, I didn’t mean it.
And if I did
You deserved it.”
Do people think this is the kind of behavior that should be supported by the Harmony ONE team?
This is how the project lead continues to act, and if you’re concerned I’m taking it out of context, you can probably look at them for yourselves in their TG. In my opinion his behavior is actually worse when you look at the totality of it, but that’s just me, and you should decide for yourself.
Seems like you do have valid arguments. Why don’t you involve in the discussion there ? You could ask questions and post it here right ? I don’t agree with the stealing part though. It doesn’t make any sense at all. Could you explain it ?
Update : I have not invested in this project (priced out). I did talk to few people from the NYAN community, seems like the community is okay with Stephen’s move. What is you concern really as the community have welcomed Stephen’s move?
The issue OneVoice is mentioning is basically that he (and many others) were not allowed to continually dump rewards from the ONE solo staking pool, which were set to something abysmally high, by mistake, (around 30k% APY…meanwhile, solo delegating your ONEs gets you around…10%).
This all happened within a 2 hour timespan, and @OneVoice is making it seem as if he was putting his capital to work and risked a lot to get that 30k% APY which was never meant to be in the first place. Harmony veterans such as @Kloonike agreed with the choice we made to axe the rewards by 95%, and, even after the 95% reward axing of the ONE solo staking pool, we have ended up having more TVL in that pool alone than we had during the first few launch hours on the entire farm. This shows that, despite our initial mistake, it was the right thing to actually reward risk-takers (which ONE solo farmers certainly aren’t, as hard as they might try to convince you).
The only thing lost was their capital’s productivity for the 2 hour period after we launched. It would be the same result as if the ONE pool didn’t work from the get-go, at all, and you could only use the other pools. Those rewards were never theirs to begin with, and a programming error/lapse in judgement on our side made them higher than they should have been.
Have their ONEs been stolen? No. Come into the chat, or ping us on twitter if they have, we will look into it.
We’re en route to 2 million TVL today, with strong JP and CN community engagement, with the token price recovering from 0.28 to almost 1.10.
What does this tell us?
- That we were right to not let people who took little to no risk dump their rewards on those who actively invested in the Harmonyan ecosystem.
That the people who were actively moaning about “being stolen from” (which is the furthest thing from the truth) are now buying Harmonyan at a higher price, because they have seen our intentions in making everyone whole, so that no one loses their initial capital.
They insulted validators who actually provide value to the ONE ecosystem for criticizing them and implied they were just greedy and mad that they couldn’t continue to be greedy.
By the time an epoch starts or ends, your capital isn’t really making gains, is it, as a validator, or am I mistaken?
It’s not an insult to call someone out for what they are - greedy. You wanted 3000x the gains that a validator gets, and without any waiting time to undelegate/delegate your ONEs, and you wanted it to be sustainable (not even self-sustainable, which you clearly don’t care). If you cared about the network consensus, you would be using your ONEs for a 10% APY. I stand by what I said in those conveniently edited screenshots, you are complaining about a misprice not being honored, and are threatening to sue Amazon or call the BBB about “Amazon ripping you off” for not being able to get a mispriced iPhone 13 Pro Max 512GB.
I’d really like @Jacksteroo and his opinion on this.
The Discord voted to burn. Telegram (which was much more active) voted to give everyone free money at the cost of those who bought the native token (HNYAN0. How do you explain this?
Also, bear in mind, you could literally invite 20 of your friends to vote on the poll, who have nothing to do with this, and you could rig it in your favor.
The poll is not a governance snapshot, and people who have a stake in the project, who invested in the project itself via HNYAN purchases, are the ones that have a say. The poll was just a guideline for us, not law. If we did not act in the “communities” best interest as you say, then why did the TVL go up to 2 million almost and why is the price at 1.10? Had it gone the other way around, it would still be stuck at 0.30 and the TVL would be abysmal. Price can go either way, but TVL shows people are comfortable putting their assets (even in the solo staking ONE pool that’s been slashed by 95%, the very same one you keep complaining about!!!) in our hands.
No Stefan, I just have principles. He asks why I’m not saying these things in the telegram where he can ban and mute me and continue to control the conversation surrounded by people who have a financial interest in his meme token. A question for the ages there.
No one was stealth-banned or muted in the Telegram, you can scroll for yourself and check this. And they never will be. You got banned, publicly, with a reason, timed ban, for spamming about why you’re not being compensated insane amounts of money for very little risk assumed, and why an obvious misprice (basic math error, as you say it) was not being honored, to the detriment of the native token holders.
False. Was anyone’s ONE stolen from them? Let us know here if that’s the case.
Hahaha, that’s rich, so basically you are saying that you’re writing this smear piece on this thread because your feelings were hurt, and you wanted your ego to be fed. That just proves we were right to do what we did, and the Telegram chat sentiment proves this, as does the TVL and price.
6.65 million HNYAN was burned, 90% of that was the initial rewards emission for the ONE solo staking pool. That leaves us with a smaller amount of unclaimed rewards, which would end up being dumped one way or another onto the heads of those who bought the HNYAN token. There were people doing that already, and given Harmony’s cheap fees, they were doing that relentlessly.
The people who have benefited from my actions are the people who bought the Harmonyan token, not the people staking their ONEs for 3000x the delegation standard, expecting for it to last. I did the right thing.
That’s right, I redistributed the wealth in an equitable and justifiable way, that has since propelled to project to higher highs. Take some time to refer to this. Edgeworth box - Wikipedia
The dev funds are less than the SOLO ONE POOL reward emissions, plus they are vested over a time period of 3 months, so it’d physically be impossible to do what you just mentioned, and it would also hinder the multiplying effect that the use of those funds (marketing, onboarding a new dev, etc) would have on the project. You’ve never managed a project, and you’re saying all of this from the angle of a disgruntled Karen.
You are laying the problem with your behavior at the feet of others. I don’t care if the rewards are 50% or 5% or .5%. You seized and burned people’s staking rewards that they earned by risking their ONE with you. That and the way you behaved and continue to behave afterwards is the issue. Deciding the initial rewards were too high and redeploying a lower emission pool is not the issue, no matter how much you try and use that as a deflection and a strawman.
The events of your launch prove that people were putting their capital at significant risk with you
Good for him, he’s perfectly entitled to his opinion. Like I said, multiple times previously, shutting down the initial solo ONE pool probably was the right call. Again, you minimize. Putting funds with someone you don’t know is a risk. You proved this. Your post hoc justification that everyone got their funds back eventually doesn’t mean they didn’t engage in risk. That you don’t think that risk was worthy of the rewards is an opinion. Shutting down the first contract and opening another (or even not opening another) is a little shaky, but if that was all you did, I wouldn’t even be here making this post.
Which was it, a programming error or lapse in judgement? The story seems to change depending on the circumstances. At least you’re now acknowledging your users suffered loss, even if you are still trying to minimize it. What is the value of your capital being out of commission and in a questionable state to you? Do you think that’s a universal answer that you just get to answer for everybody? How much money would you need from me to hold all your capital for a few hours? If I then didn’t give you what we agreed on you, what do you think that is?
People engaged with a contract controlled by parties of unknown legitimacy and motive to them. That is significant risk. Stop minimizing it. Why don’t you just give me all your ONE for 2 hours? Don’t worry there’s no risk I promise I’ll give them back. I’ll even give you an APR. When I give them back I’ll change my mind and not give you any APR. That’s ok though, because you don’t deserve it, because I’ve decided it’s a minimal risk, and you giving me that ONE temporarily wasn’t actually supporting me.
It’s more of an obvious deflection and an insult. You distract from own actions and try to get them to defend themselves against you’re accusations to derail them. You’re trying and failing again, to divert attention from you your behavior and mistakes onto your users to blame them. I don’t understand how it’s so shocking to you that people could have a problem with what you did. If somebody did this on a completely different chain, on a project I didn’t engage with whatsoever, I’d still consider it bad behavior. When they’re asking for a grant on a chain I do care about, yes, I’m going to point out their behavior. Greed has nothing to do with it on my end. Post the context of any of my screenshots if you think they misrepresent you so badly. I mentioned that anyone can go to the TG and see for themselves. To me, it makes you look worse if you read the TG in it’s entirety starting yesterday afternoon, but I invite anyone to come to their own conclusions.
So basically, you just ignored the poll you didn’t like and went with the one you did like. You could easily rig the discord poll if you wanted. Even if the users agreed unanimously, what you did was wrong. 100 people agreeing to steal from 1 person doesn’t make it ok. That the users in telegram voted not to steal from your users and you decided to anyway just highlights it.
From deflection and minimization to justification. The price change does not justify your actions. If stealing from your neighbor tomorrow made the price go to $10, would you then say the new price is proof you did the right thing?
Straw man again, deflection. I didn’t say you stole ONE from people. You even admit above in the thread you cost them 2 hours of opportunity and use of their capital, and you seized their unclaimed rewards. That is STEALING. None of your justifications, deflections, or minimizations change that.
No, I’m writing this thread because you STOLE from your users, and you’re asking for a grant. You getting that grant is that much sooner that the grant funding runs out, and another project that might not get funding. I think the people considering it deserve to know what they’re supporting if they give you the grant. If you knew I burned down someone’s house, but was applying to be a fireman in your community, would you just say nothing? If you pointed out I burned down someone else’s house do you think me saying “Well I didn’t burn down your house, why do you care, it was a small house anyway?” would be a legitimate excuse? Again, notice how Stefan deflects everything away from his actual actions. I’m allegedly the one who’s mad. I’m allegedly writing a smear piece. Everyone who criticizes him must just be greedy. The price is good, so whatever I did must be ok. All a deflection from his own actions.
When a private individual redistributes wealth involuntarily it is called stealing Stefan.
You said in Telegram it was a “maybe 30k NYAN.” burned. Your site says the dev pool was going to be, 5 million NYAN, 4.5k of it you say on the site is linearly vested? Is committing .006% of your total dev pool to not steal from your users, even in the form of a commitment to a future airdrop if necessary, too big of a commitment for you? You’re intentionally conflating the total emissions for that pool with what you burned. I never suggested you pull from the dev pool to replace all the pool emissions, I said you should have pulled from the dev pool to replace the unclaimed rewards you seized and burned. You conflated this just like you’ve been intentionally conflating you shutting down the first single stake pool with you burning the unclaimed rewards. That way you can pretend anyone who has a problem with you stealing user rewards just wanted the pool to die. It’s obvious what you’re doing. It’s probably been the most transparent thing you’ve done with regards to this “project”.
You pretty much all the way through the narcissist’s prayer in one post Stefan, congratulations.
That didn’t happen. (I didn’t steal) And if it did, it wasn’t that bad. (just funds being unavailable) And if it was, that’s not a big deal. (I only stole their staking rewards) And if it is, that’s not my fault. (it was the communities fault) And if it was, I didn’t mean it. (I had to protect my project, others agree) And if I did, you deserved it. (they’re just greedy)
Your patronizing tone will not make you seem right, no matter how much you write. It seems it really is a matter of your ego being hurt, and you don’t care about Harmonyan at all.
You are not getting free money at the expense of the $HNYAN token holders who showed faith and risked more than you did. No matter how much you write, whether in prose or poem form, you will not take value from Harmonyan holders, and you will not persuade anyone else, although I applaud your efforts, I’m sure this “skill” will come in handy when you do launch your
own projects, on your own terms.
The discussion on this matter ends here. Buy $HNYAN if you want staking rewards. Invest in us, and get rewarded. Simple as.
I don’t think this project should receive a grant. I’ve been attempting to speak with the team for the last 24 hours and have received the run around on most questions. Another individual who has also been asking questions had their serious questions avoided as well.
They have published unverified contracts. The contract owner is the dev. They have no timelock. Lack of documentation. The project doesn’t show you what you’ve staked or how much your rewards are in the UI. The vfat tools does work though.
Beyond that - when I asked that they publish their contracts, they published empty contracts and posted a message saying they were in contact with an auditor to review those contracts, but the contracts were empty.
This is the contract git hub they published… with a single commit.
16 hours later they published copy and pasted contracts with next to no changes. No emergency withdrawal features. No contract addresses in the contracts. Basically very low security – free for the owner (dev) to be able to transfer tokens where and how they please.
The contracts live on chain are still unverified. I asked the team to publish the contract source to the contracts on explorer.harmony.one so that they could be verified on chain as the contracts that are actually active. They’ve ignored the request.
All of the accounts on discord and telegram are accounts unique to this project. I asked them about why all their accounts start with “Nyan” and were created specifically for this project. They say it’s “normal” – but I argued that it removes the ability to vet or track the involvement of these team members in past interactions. “Santa” team member admits they have another account in discord, but does not disclose what it is.
The team said that 4.5 Million Tokens were locked with a linear vesting schedule to be released over 3 months to the dev. When I pointed out that this was not what was setup and that the dev had the 4.5 Million HNYAN tokens in their wallet and could be withdrawn or sold at any time and were not locked in a contract or in any vested agreement - the story changed and the Team said they would now be burning “4 Million” tokens as a sign of good faith.
The story line given by the devs changes when the observed actions do not line up with what was previous stated to be the tokenomics / plan / action / terms.
Also – this project seems to have been funded by THIS wallet:
Which also has been involved with other copy pasta projects like “Ant Miner” and possibly with some other Olympus project that has 10 Million OLY tokens idling in another wallet.
100,000,000 Million (max supply) of the HNYAN token have already been minted according to Harmony Explorer I can only account for 20M of the tokens so far but the dev has said that they are all minted, but they are not in the contracts. Due to limitations with the harmony.explorer going back more than 100TX on a wallet or contract has been tedious and slow and my investigation will take more time since the team has been uncooperative in disclosing where the remaining 80,000,000 minted tokens are being held.
In the commentary above - people had previously asked about the GitHub and technical specifications and those questions had been ignored and instead the responses seem to be directed at the person or derailed onto “other projects do it, so what’s the problem” response lines.See the questions from @Jacksteroo
I think those types of responses are unprofessional and we should expect (demand?) a greater level of professionalism and accountability with projects that receive grants.
Too many red flags with this projects for me to support granting any money.
This isn’t about me, no matter how much you try and make your mistakes about other people. This is about your actions. Trying to deflect from your theft does not erase it. I’ll let anyone reading decide for themselves who they think has the ego problem between the two of us. You calling me egotistical does not justify your actions. You deflect, shift blame, and try to make personal attacks about anyone criticizing you in an attempt to discredit them. Maybe it’s because you do actually know that your actions and indefensible.
Yes, it’s quite clear you believe that you’re the only one entitled to take things from other people. Ad hominem attacks against your critics appear to be your only defense. That in a way, speaks for itself.
Your team set up the contract without changing any emission rewards, not anyone else. That doesn’t give you a license to steal from people. You blatantly trying to shift blame for your actions onto other people does not change where it belongs.
This isn’t your telegram, you don’t decide what discussions are allowed here.
now their team in discord is saying unclaimed rewards will be “gone”
So in the span of about one hour the team announced they are canceling the old contracts and deployed new contracts and anyone who wasn’t paying attention in that one hour span the team has said they’ve lost any unclaimed rewards.
The missing 66 Million HNYAN has been “found” and now will be burned along with rewards and new contracts deployed.
… and this was the “what happens next” I was eluding to early where they’ve revoked the old contracts, taken all the unclaimed rewards out – and are now going to burn the tokens to pump the price.
Here’s the specific tx where the unclaimed reward tokens were scraped from the OLD contracts and put into the DEV wallet.
UPDATE: this post was flagged as SPAM and hidden for hours today while all the mess of liquidating contracts and burning almost 3/4 of the “total supply” happened.
There were no HNYAN missing, those were from the old reward emission contracts. New contracts are deployed, the burn does not affect the price, it makes the token more scarce, but people are buying the coins of their own volition now as we approach BSCNYAN launch.
Stick around for Medium update of the tokenomics. This is DeFi.
