My trust in Liqwid is broken since they dumped the entire weight of the losses on the people who should take special care, which are the LQ investors who were promised extraordinary rewards so that they would not sell their LQ in full inflationary expansion and denied them their acquired rights as soon as they acquired them. Not only that, Florian had no qualms about completely ignoring the entire Liqwid community who spoke out against it. He also had no qualms about using the votes of the LQ assigned to the core team to win a vote whose NO votes were the largest of all the votes that occurred in the NO DAO. However, Florian was not satisfied with this and, being able to opt for less aggressive alternatives towards LQ holders that would not harm Liqwid, he chose to ignore the interests of LQ holders, showing zero gratitude to those who have kept the price of LQ. So much absurdity has subsequently been seen in the LQ/ADA price despite the great reduction in inflation as it could not be otherwise. I see them too confident that they will be the only lending protocol of their nature on Cardano and perhaps of that arrogance, these muds.
I expect very little or nothing from someone who, with accomplished facts, shows you his absolute economic contempt instead of due gratitude. Donât worry, Florian, I honestly donât expect you to understand. If you had the ability to understand why you should not deceive others, I suppose you would not have done it.
It had the possibility and consensus to also reduce the LQ staking emissions to a fixed amount and then distribute them by distinguishing the age of the LQ staked under the unfulfilled promises. He had no reason to refuse, not even economic or inflation. However, they used their immense voting power to disregard both the morality of their actions and the voice of the community and you were left so calm. That can only mean one thing, he only cares about his own interests, only yours. Their interests no matter what the cost and no matter what is unfulfilled. But I tell you one thing:
âI would have given Liqwid much more than Liqwid got by cheating on me.â
@TNT1 You donât speak for me or the âentire communityâ. Myself and many others voted for the proposal. You put in work or you buy the token to increase your voting power thatâs how a DAO works.
My statement literally says âhe ignored the entire community that voted against.â Periods and commas are important to read correctly⌠then what happens happens. By the way, Iâll explain the context: it refers to the fact that Florianâs proposal completely ignored the will of more than half of the temperature control participants and voters. That, in case you donât understand, means that he presented a proposal at the opposite extreme of what the minimum consensus between the parties involved means.
He disdained the interests of those who had supported his company to date. We were deceived and, at the same time, and this is the most serious thing, we were not taken into account when there was a viable consensus alternative.
That you donât agree?
Okay! okay!
But let me speak for those I speak and if you think that you are the only person who exists in this world and that if it is not spoken in your name it is not spoken in the name of anyone, I suggest you do 3 things:
Look at the number of NO votes the proposal received in the DAO. The largest amount in the historical series.
Look at the result of the temperature control and explain to me what was taken into account for Florian to present a consensus proposal. And this taking into account that Florian should theoretically be grateful to those of us who supported his business at the height of the LQâs inflationary peak.
Look at the little hearts that appear in my first comment.
You can try to backpedal with some semantics, if you wish⌠but itâs clear you are trying to imply the entire community voted against it. If you wanted to talk about about a subset of the community you would have prefaced it with portion or segment. Regardless, Iâll give you the benefit of the doubt here. (ignoring that you were banned from discord for personal attacks and mistruths)
1. Look at the number of NO votes the proposal received in the DAO. The largest amount in the historical series.
Do you think that this vote should be taken too seriously when;
Anyone can create an account, even if they donât hold LQ?
You donât know the relative voting power of each individual voting?
30 people total voted yes or no (there are over 7000 wallets holding LQ)
Furthermore, have you determined an appropriate level at which a formal vote should be triggered or declined?
2. Look at the result of the temperature control and explain to me what was taken into account for Florian to present a consensus proposal. And this taking into account that Florian should theoretically be grateful to those of us who supported his business at the height of the LQâs inflationary peak.
Iâm not them, you would have to ask them directly. I donât believe that there is any binding them to take the feedback provided and directly implement it into the proposal. Florian, DC, & the entire team, donât owe anything to any specific subset of the community. The only thing they owe (and this is opinion based)⌠is ensuring the overall health, sustainability, & growth of the liqwid finance platform.
3. Look at the little hearts that appear in my first comment.
Who the hell cares about a few little hearts. What is this, 1st grade? DM an address and Iâll ship you some stickers if you are interested in little hearts.
The fact that DAO members can be banned from the discord for disagreeing with the sentiment of the core team is antithetical to the core principles of what crypto is all about. I have high hopes for Liqwid, but what Iâve seen recently worries me GREATLY.
Thank you for your involvement in our community and I want to address your points to ensure clarity and maintain transparency.
Firstly, itâs important to emphasize that our primary goal is to foster a respectful and constructive environment for all community members. While we deeply value diverse opinions and healthy debates, we also have to maintain a space where all members feel safe and respected. Therefore, individuals may face consequences, including being banned, if they engage in inappropriate behavior or disrespect other users.
The open nature of the blockchain spirit does not equate to a lack of guidelines or community standards. Effective communication and mutual respect are foundational to any community, including those in the crypto and DeFi spaces.
Florian, if you check the tape youâd see that none of my comments were at all disrespectful. in fact, it was DCâs inflammatory remarks that were not at all constructive or indicative of respect. I agree that without civil discourse thereâs no room for healthy debate, but when core team members are aggressive towards opinions they donât agree with you canât expect us to take it sitting down. If my comments havenât been deleted, you can even see that I made an attempt to end the ridiculous argument that was occurring in the governance channel. I could at least understand the ban put on TNT for his remarks, but nowhere did I engage in the kind of conduct you describe. If weâre looking at the situation objectively, DC shouldâve been flagged for his aggressive behavior.
In the content, the greatest disrespect committed against the community was done by you promising 50% APR rewards to eliminate them just when they are reached, thus burdening all the losses on the investors of your LQ token.
I got banned from Discord just for saying I donât trust you or DC after the magnitude of the 50% APR scam. My only words were that I would not buy a second hand car from them. Itâs the truth.
What you censor is freedom of expression. It is contrary to the spirit of decentralization.
This is not about you blocking me because I disrespect you. You block me to prevent me from expressing the reality of the acts you perform.
@FlorianVolery Something needs to be done with DC in the Discord channel. He is unhinged, giving the project a bad reputation with his attitude and banning everyone he disagrees with.
Well there was definitely a portion of the community that was against it that was in the protocol from day one and was entitled to 50% APR. And we got about 4 months of 50% APR. I personally consider this a scam. Nobody forced the team to propose 50% APR it could have easily been 20% APR. Personally I will not vote for any proposal. Because my opinion doesnât matter. And the team will do whatever they want. Iâm not going to participate in the decentralization game.