Let me start by highlighting my new account shouldnât discredit the rest of my post. I have been an investor since 2019 and diamond-handed through every ATH since then.
This proposal, as many have agreed and reiterated, is extremely harmful not only to the chain but to its users.
Harmony has had the best communities form over time and now the team (mainly @stse and @lij according to some team members) wants to destroy the community and take 0 responsibility for a security issue they failed to resolve.
Furthermore, according to a reliable source, the Treasury holds enough to FULLY repeg the bridge and make users whole. The downside being that it would be drained and the chain would âshut downâ. As shown in transparency reports, itâs around $1.2m/month to keep servers + RPCs up.
However, making users whole is the NUMBER ONE PRIORITY.
Assume @stse and @lij actually agree and move forward with this idea.
You can RAISE NEW FUNDS FROM THE COMMUNITY AND VCs. Printing tokens will not work and never has.
Sell some of your vesting tokens and raise 8-9 figures in USD/stables for years of runway. And thatâs just scratching the surface of source of funds.
If you donât make users whole, GG.
itâs around $1.2m/month to keep servers + RPCs up.
The fact that it requires that much from a centralized source each month just to keep the chain functioning POORLY should be enough to know itâs a failed project.
What we SHOULD do is fork something that works like the Evmos codebase, keep everyones balances but the teams and move forward as a community chain on a platform with a consensus system that actually works. That way we could use a proven consensus system and the 150 validators wouldnât be spread across 4 shards when only 1 of them actually does anything useful.
It would also be FAR more stable and run at a fraction of the cost which could be carried by community validators.
We also wouldnât have the drag of the team which sadly has been draining resources in the form of time and money building something that doesnât even work nearly as well as the open source Tendermint consensus code.
We could also leave the incompetent leadership and their egos on the side of the road where they belong.
Hello EveryOne.
After reading everything, I came with an idea to be discussed.
What about to, instead of start an inflation in harmony asset, reduce some % of token burning in each transaction for a fund and do a proper reimbursement for harmony community? I can imagine that no one will lose, and may embrace this idea. @stse @lij
Hello, I am a person affected by the hacking.
English is not my native language, so this is an automatic translation, I donât know if it will be accurate, but please allow me to convey it.
I deposited the affected stable coins with Tranquil Finance and I am not sure if my wallet will be covered if a snapshot is taken.
It is up to the validators to decide if this proposal will be accepted, but I just want to know if it will be covered.
I look forward to hearing back from you when you have time.
This is completely unacceptable.
This is a bad solution developerâs mistakes are borne by the whole community, we should sue this team to make them really work for the users.
This is a bullshit plan. Is issuing additional tokens useful? All we need is a 1:1 bridge from 1USDC. I really have a suspicion that you guys staged this hack.
Itâs hard for me to imagine that this is THE BEST way forward. Is it really just as simple as printing ONE to reimburse? I understand that the Foundation shouldnât be completely drained, but no skin in the game from the team? Printing 5B tokens is laughable, but it seems thatâs what weâve been reduced to.
I stand against minting more ONE this wouldnât be fair for the current holders! I suggest the team to pay those affect by the hack from their own $ONE. The Two proposal you are inforcing on the community isnât fair nor what we are expecting from such a great project.
Regards
Iâd be happier if the disbursement started IN three years time and continued to the end of year six. ie, give current #ONE holders 3 years and hopefully another bull run. A Mt Gox style return of assets timeframe ( thatâs been 8-ish years).
It might take too much time.
Those proposals are flawed, not because of inflation.
Inflation is a necessity if the funds canât be found. Basically, those who cover for the loss are the whole Harmony one community.
I found it fair: This should be a decentralized organization (hint: Itâs not) so itâs expected that the community itself is going to get the one paying the price if funds cannot be found in the Harmony Foundation treasury.
But:
- No word about how those tokens are going to be extracted for circulation. The main part of the proposal is blurry:
If an impacted wallet lost $1,000 USD from the hack, that wallet will receive a total of 50,000 ONE tokens
What does this mean? Honestly, I have no idea; are they going to take a snapshot at the moment of the hack and give One to those people? What about those traders who bought the depegged assets at discount hoping to sell them back for One with a proposal like this one?
Those two others options (50% and 0%) are a spitting in the face of the community. They are extremely dangerous also, as those who will vote are not those who does lost fund.
Take for example Binance, having 30% of the One as token; are they going to push in favors to the 100% refund if they didnât own any 1Token? Maybe not; if they are selfish (which is the prerequisite of any sound investor) they will push to no refund or 50% refund only.
Thatâs ridiculous and Iâm extremely disappointed by the team proposal, also very disappointed that no proposals are coming from the community.
This proposal with One emission is basically my proposal Post-hack Harmony proposal - Google Sheets
I wrote 72 hours AFTER the hack, except it doesnât cover edge cases, assets burn, and gives a fixed rate of emission for one, which negates the possibility for arbitrage. And doesnât offer proper compensation (100% or 50% over a period of time. Risks without rewardsâŚ)
One month to think of THAT is an insult, I was expecting something else.
I only hold ONE, no exposure to bridge or hacked assets. I donât agree with this proposal where you intend to significantly dilute my investment which is, frankly, already worthless at this point, with nothing positive happening that makes me think it will go back up in future.
This proposal is pathetic. The idea that it took weeks to brainstorm this would be comical, if it werenât for the very real impact this incident has had on ordinary peopleâs lives.
How about you start by selling your big, blue fucking apes and see if you can get a fraction of what you paid for them? They were to diversify the treasury, right?
Use the treasury and refund 20% to the affected wallets each year, for five years. Or 10% over ten years. Whatever is feasible without obliterating the treasury.
People with exposed assets might not like the timeline but this is better than losing everything and getting nothing back.
You can also fundraise a reimbursement fund. I would donate occasionally to help repay those affected quicker and iâm sure others will too.
Also, get a VC that knows how to run and develop a business involved. They could partially capitalise a reimbursement fund and also be involved in the development of Harmony from a business perspective. That way, us poor sucker retail investors might start seeing a return on our investment and we could stop lurching from one calamitous, embarrassing PR fuck up to the next.
And someone fix Tseâs hairline.
Yeah, I only have ONE and no bridged tokens as well, so no skin in the repegging game for me.
A Mt Gox timeframe 100% reimbursement for those who lost out is my proposal, starting in 3 years time, which hopefully is enough time for another bull run so ONE holders can have a chance to take profits before the MASSIVE dilution starts occurring to reimburse those who have lost out.
Youâll have skin in the game when ONE goes to 0.001
Iâve always supported Stephen and Li, but this is garbage. The fact that almost all of the core team were against this and Stephen & Li still pushed ahead with this garbage proposal is disappointing to say the least. As much as this hurts to say, Li and Stephen are clearly out of touch with the community and need to be replaced.
âthe user will continue to receive a total of 50,000 ONE regardless of token priceââŚso I have to understand from here that your expectations are that the price of one will never increase more than 0.02âŚotherwise this phrase has no logicâŚyou must rethink guysâŚotherwise we will witness a domino game of this project
You have to be joking. Seriously? You needed 1 month of thinking to come up with this âbrilliantâ plan? Câmon this is the typical âsolutionâ any centralized economy applies. There is no problem the money printer canât fix. You are not Harmony anymore, you are the Fed 2.0. You are so disappointing trying to make us pay all the bill in the end⌠the community is only important for you when it comes to bring the money in. If you want us to pay you will have to give us more power, we are not stupids. Otherwise do what you really have to do to solve this which is ask for a loan and restore the assets on the bridge.
I think it is wrong to put the entire financing of the re-pegging on the back of investors and the community. This is not set to create but rather destroy value.
I have come to know other core members have had other suggestions and I would like either:
- Bring out community proposals and decide based on the most voted and feasible.
- Make the proposals of other core members public, for the community to see.
Cheers.
Pedro27: No, where do you get that from? They are simply saying the amount of ONE they recieve is based on a point in time to do the reimbursement calculation, currently at 2c.
If ONE goes up above 2c, the value of their reimbursed ONE also goes up. But the quantity of reimbursed ONE doesnât change.