I appreciate the work they put into this as well, jump starting the negotiation process, and I think they should be paid for their time and stop working on it quite frankly. We don’t have another 8 days after 3 weeks have passed of them working on this to wait and can and should use ONE for a snapshot vote. They jumped the shark on the smart contracts without ever finalizing a proposal and instead just talking about the situation in their own private messages. We need the decision makers to come here publicly and explain what they are talking about behind closed doors all day long because it could have been rejected before starting work.
We’re talking about tens of millions of dollars, and its time to be transparent. It has clearly become a bigger program for lenders and Tranquil Finance so how much more than 86M ONE are they now being provisioned out of this? If $1.7M is going to them in Stephen’s, that only leaves $700K of the remaining $2.4M for the Recovery One plan which is even less likely to work in supplanting exit liquidity parity or incentivizing rONE staking.
@Pioneer does not speak on behalf of the community. There’s been no election whatsoever, no vote on which proposal will be the “official proposal” and the Recovery One proposal is not the community’s proposal. Its disingenuous to continue to call it community governed when I have never seen the community more opposed to the hard-fork with inflation. If that’s the absolute only way versus no reimbursement at all, this is not an improvement from even Stephen’s basic proposal.
I fail to see how Stephen’s DeFi Partner provision wasn’t the same thing provisioning 86M ONE to reimburse AAVE, Tranquil, etc. which is $1.7M of the inflation supply at $0.02. Why doesn’t that save DeFi without creating a new staking variant? It sounds good but what does it mean? Give them the funds that were over-borrowed which then the collateral probably mostly gets withdrawn. They agree not to close down their Harmony deployment (which begs the question if they are threatening the chain over it?). Why does that save DeFi? 98% of the TVL is going be gone with DeFi Kingdoms and the TVL had been dropping significantly in the bear market anyways. To save DeFi you need happy users, the community to rally behind, and that are going to continue to stake, use dexes, and the chain more broadly. This is not getting there at all. Yes, you need lenders but they were already going to get 86M ONE (~$1.7M).
We have made virtually no progress from Stephen’s original proposal given the lack of details of what Recovery One is even suggesting here. We wasted 3 weeks coming up with 18 community proposals and not a single one is part of this. Now we need another week for them to finish smart contracts and an audit before we’ve even seen the proposal. Apparently, its the same hard-fork 2.5B with the extra bloat that as I’ve repeatedly questioned, lacks a coherent explanation as to 1) what the plan even is and 2) how it will even work. It adds risk and significant expenses which cannot be accounted for in a remotely basic fashion thus far.
Stephen’s original proposal with 15% of the treasury and 1+ BAYC added to it for solidarity, all going to the victims, with the 86M ONE for DeFi, I think would pass a blockchain wide ONE vote before they even finish this revised proposal.