How is the Recovery One proposal any different? Its totally contingent on this farming utility to actually work in a bear market where no single other defi utility token has maintained value on Harmony and in crypto in general. So the victims have to wait 3 years banking on this working or rage quit into a tiny liquidity pool at a very small parity and even smaller parity to account for millions in undisclosed expenses.
Furthermore, it adds in the additional risk that rONE itself fails even if ONE does reasonably well and it appears the users are being forced to accept redemption in rONE or receive nothing. Its far worse than Stephen’s proposal, does absolutely nothing to change the inflation numbers which were proposed in Stephen’s proposal and adds a markup for Recovery One to exist when its completely unnecessary. Stephen’s proposal is much cleaner if they are going to inflate it away anyways which is clearly the case at this point.
The entire premise of Recovery One was that it was community governed but this is now not the case. They didn’t consider any community feedback, don’t want to engage in tough questions here, and so the entire proposal exists solely to gain this 5% cut of the victim’s compensation funds. Stephens was the exact same, print 2.5B tokens. Except they don’t get anything for this defi experiment and whatever else.
Stephen’s plan accounted for many more factors except the victims got ONE token directly and 100% of whatever was printed (sans the provision to “save defi” which was there anyways):
Option #1: 100% redemption, no 5% haircut, no extremely low ball parity value up front
The first option proposed is an estimated 100% reimbursement with a minting of 4.97B ONE, which equates to a 3-year monthly emission of 138M tokens ($2.76M using the token price of $0.020). Minted tokens will be gradually brought into circulation over the 3-year period.
Option #2: 50% reimbursement with lower inflation.
The second option proposed is an estimated 50% reimbursement with a minting of 2.48B ONE, which equates to a 3-year monthly emission of 69M ONE tokens ($1.38M using the token price of $0.020). Minted tokens will be gradually brought into circulation over the 3-year period.
No 5% haircut.
No upfront payment of millions to Recovery One.
It was the exact same proposal, requiring a hardfork, it just didn’t have this 5% amount for Recovery One to figure out some new defi token at the expense of the victims and give people a significantly reduced reimbursement.
From Stephen’s:
“The proposal requires a hard-fork which means the Harmony team alone cannot put the proposal into effect; validator participation and buy-in will be needed in order to bring this to production. If you are staked with a validator, we urge you to communicate with your validators to help ensure their decision is made with your feedback in mind.”
It also still accounted for Defi Partners as well:
“Failing to resolve these uncollectible loans may result in DeFi lending protocols choosing to drop support for Harmony on their platforms. An additional 86M ONE (included in the proposed options) will be minted as part of the reimbursement plan, and distributed to certain affected DeFi protocols over the same 3-year period, to mitigate losses resulting from uncollectible loans.”