@DC1 This is completely true! Your team validated that all ADA suppliers would receive 100% of the Night air dropped based on the supply they provided the LQ protocol. We all confirmed this months before the air drop. To validate this your are wrong in this statement, your team validated the amounts we would receive over the 4 thaw dates. No way would I have left money in the protocol knowing I would not be eligible for the night air drop tokens. This comment is very concerning and should be seen by all involved. Also, the temp check for your proposal has zero interest. That is a fact. This is not a votable topic based on the rules of the protocol. How is this happening?
2 Likes
Some important points you have mentioned here I would like to respond to:
but I bet you fully know neither Liqwid the protocol nor the DAO operates in a vacuum, especially in a small ecosystem struggling to get outside attention and capital inflows.
Yes of course I recognize the ecosystem Liqwid operates in it informs all of the decisions I propose and make as a co-founder of Liqwid. Nonetheless if we do not continue building and advancing the protocol Liqwid will be irrelevant when the Cardano DeFi ecosystem becomes large with strong capital inflows. I remain as optimistic on Cardano DeFi as when I initially founded Liqwid in late 2020.
A vote with one choice does not highlight the differing options that are on the table for distributing the NIGHT. Again LQ Stakers will be the ultimate deciders of this not a single individual nor entity.
Have you reviewed the protocol revenues recently on the Analytics page? The protocol currently is not earning enough revenue to pay for its development or operations and revenue has decreased significantly even since Proposal 110 was passed.
I am still forming which option I will vote for based on the data and the discussions being had.
One thing that is very clear to me from the latest discussions both here and on Discord is there has been some false idea created that the Liqwid core development team is able to continue building and delivering new revenue generating products without receiving adequate compensation. This is 100% false and not how any functioning DAO or development entity can exist in perpetuity. If the Liqwid ecosystem feels the deployment of V3 and upcoming products is important then we need to understand the source of funding for said developments is an equally important question that must be answered. You can call this dramatic but it is simply the truth that I see next to no one speaking of. There is a free lunch mentality here that is simply not the reality of how software gets built and maintained whether in a decentralized or centralized context.
DC, I have 3-4 years of using LQ protocol and loving it, loving the team as pioneers and crypto brothers on this journey. Watching the YouTube interviews with the founding members and being excited for Cardano Defi (still am). Seeing the DEFI strats explained for new users to get on boarded, and loving it. What are we becoming with this vote?
It’s unimaginable in hindsight. At a later date, what is stopping the LQ team from a DAO proposal to take ADA supplier staking rewards (from the LQ SPOs) and using them to fund development? It would be unacceptable, of course. That’s what is happening here with the NIGHT airdrop. NIGHT airdrop is not an LQ holder gift or grift.
- The proposal was introduced in great detail with 2 outs in the 9th inning, right before the airdrop availability. Come on, bro…DC I always loved your fire and defending LQ. This is awful.
- What is the competitive advantage in doing this to existing users of the protocol, erasing confidence in a valued product?
- This is merely ostracizing and punishing existing longtime ADA suppliers and stable borrows because new users did not arrive to provide protocol revenue. Why punish users who have been here since the jump? This is not growth-oriented.
DC, peace and brotherly love to you and the LQ founders.
1 Like
It seems your’re the one, DC1, with the “free lunch mentality”. We are the suppliers/users/customers of the LQ platform, who are already providing funding through interest payments and fees. It’s your job to raise capital to fund how the software gets built and the platform maintained. Not take the NIGHT owed to the ADA suppliers to help fund the DAO. This is honestly lack of performance and pure desperation to attempt to keep the NIGHT. It is just flat out wrong to not allow the supporters on this platform to have the NIGHT that we actually created from our ADA supply.
1 Like
This is awful, I can’t believe what I am reading here. This app was the only thing keeping me interested in Cardano. I suddenly feel like a bag holder and now I want to dump everything and get off this sinking ship. The community is so toxic and full of drama, this will just add to it and you might even accelerate your own demise. I have been a customer for a while but I never made the time to participate here. I was confused about my NIGHT rewards date coming and going but still not being able to collect so here I am…
2 Likes
I would support a 99 % to suppliers and 1 % to Liqwid DAO split.
→ suppliers don’t see much difference
→ DAO gets a bit more than 10 000 $ at current prices (1 % of 18.8 million $night at current 0.055 $ per token)
→ covers costs of managing the claiming and distribution.
(or less than 1% if don’t need that much to cover costs)
However, and big big warning, this might still severely push away some suppliers, who still see a trust issue about changing the plan last minute + consider it stealing what belongs to suppliers.
Might get more damage than benefits here.
For the future, clear official untouchable (even legal) documentation about suppliers rights could be useful.
1 Like
Hi @DC1
-
Conceptually there are options yes. But some could be considered badly hurting for the protocol by pushing away some suppliers and eroding trust (just as much as one can think not getting financing from such opportunities is protocol suicide).
-
Yes, I track the protocol well on my own system, with projections.
-
If there are financial troubles still after the private raise and less revenue share, the best to make it fully understandable might be to present well furnished data, rather than dispatched argumentation in forum/discord threads. That would clear any ‘false idea created that the Liqwid core development team is able to continue building and delivering new revenue generating products without receiving adequate compensation’ that you perceive. Basically, the team with the financial data and best protocol monitoring is in the position to be the one speaking well about the reality of fundings needs and possible sources. Indeed, no, the community might not be aware of eventually severe financial problems.
-
Ultimately, despite diverse or new efforts, if no financing is found before revenue is sufficient, that comes down to how much team members are willing to see the protocol survive and how much (money + time) they can put into it on a personal level.
(my background is first in field intensive conservation ecology, I could tell you a whole lot about people loosing money while working their ass off and taking personal risks for extended time periods in uneasy conditions for a vision ^^) -
Not sure what the ‘free lunch mentality’ refers to exactly this time. There is no more revenue sharing (at least now), and $night airdrop going to suppliers or to anybody else is free lunch in all cases (other than opportunity cost of holding Ada at the snapshot time and few minutes and transactions). And again, people holding $lq have a cost to it, and holding it helps the token not crash and give more financial power to $lq sales for raising capitals (less $lq to sell for a $), so they are not doing nothing to help.
(As for more direct support, I proposed a public sale in December.)
I hope the Liqwid DAO can find appropriate fundings and succeed.
In any case, the proposal is missing options with 0% to $lq stakers.
Many would argue $lq stakers have no rights to the airdrop, and that it’s not helping the DAO to give money to stakers.
Plus it’s not in accordance with the recent no more revenue share and instead more financing.
2 Likes
This is an egregious proposal this late in the game considering all of the previous documented communications from the Liqwid team! If anything other than proposal #1 happens, the reputational damage and long-term effects will be catastrophic. This certainly feels driven by the recent private equity sale of LQ tokens.
Again DC1, this is completely true. We asked for months before the snapshot if our ADA supplied to LQ would be eligible or receive the night air drop and it was confirmed by you and the LQ team that we would. This is not debatable and validated through your post. Why are you trying to do this to all of the people that supported you guys. It was known and this is a true example of how you are operating. There is zero need for a vote here. Provide the Night tokens as you guaranteed that would happen. The DAO has zero power over someone else’s money. This is the worst feeling in any experience with crypto I have ever had. Also, Minswap never stated they were participating with the Night air drop and they did provide the dropped night tokens to their suppliers. LQ is trying to do the opposite. Even as a LQ participating staker, I have zero right to use my vote as a staker to think I deserve any air dropped night tokens. Those tokens are for ADA holders.
This is a lie and your attempts to rewrite history won’t work. We will boycott your platform and all of the work you’ve put in for the last half decade will have been for nothing. Steal from the community = LOSE THE COMMUNITY
still missing a low % DAO / high % Ada suppliers choice
1 Like
I agree here with Gil, he proposed one alternative in the discord governance discussion, you banned me from discord because I directly address my concerns over this blatent attempt of using the DAO to take away the NIGHT tokens from all the ADA depositors that made your platform work. If @DC1 you have communicated either by yourself or through @Gedas / @Kylix (whom have often communicated with the community on liqwid behalf and were always kind honest and transparant) weeks or months earlier on for example splitting the NIGHT tokens 95% to ADA suppliers and 5% to the DAO for compensation I would have find that transparant and acceptable.
Thank you for kicking me out of the discord channel and for all you have done to others that are concerned about losing all of their Night tokens due to a last minute vote that you created. Unfortunately, you have zero consequences currently. This subject will not go away and you cannot control all social media. Your best move is to stop this vote due to the temp check not having any legs. Yes, I am extremely saddened by you and what you are about to do with all of the innocent people who supported your platform. This vote is only controlled by you and all of the hurt you will cause is not acceptable. Hope is not a strategy, but I hope all is changed and everyone will receive there supply of Night tokens. Hard to accept what is happening for we are all helpless and a slave to your doing. I am going to see how this progresses and proceed accordingly once settled. Still, this should never have happened…..
Proposed options have been updated to include multiple low percentage to the DAO reserves and high percentage to ADA suppliers at time of snapshot distribution options.
You were banned from the Discord server for making repeated disrespectful comments. Multiple community members have voiced their opinions on this proposal any several others who have never been banned because they did not resort to ad hominem attacks and rude comments.
looks like it’s not possible to vote for any proposal > 11.
Hi, I am new and made an account just for this proposal.
Note, I am anonymous, as I do not want to disclose my wallet or infer any information about me publicly like this. That does not mean I do not want to be heard! Also, some people will think I am DC of an insider from the LQ team, I am not, but I cant proof this
I have been holding and staking LQ for a long time, and thus carried the risk of the protocol in case of failure.
I would like to get paid for this risk. As an LQ holder I obviously will be voting for proposal 2, this is not a charity. Not your keys, not your ada! Obviously the Night belongs to protocol revenue, and thus we the stakers get to decide what will happen with it.
I hope this poll progresses onchain, as I suspect that any LQ staker will vote for proposal 2… Why would we not?
I feel for the Ada lending providers, but this is part of the risk, especially since the twitter coms where indicating otherwise (this is not a good thing, take not who operates that twitter).
Also, if you wanted the Night, you also had the opportunity to not lend the ada.
Conclusion, I understand that you want it, but as a long LQ holder, I am clearly incentive to vote proposal 2. And I think we also deserve it, as the price of LQ is not really in a good position. I long for meaningful dividends.
For further communications (if I feel like it), I will rotate the account and disclose the preimage of this sha256 hash
54c64fbf3f555e23cfeaa7e4c8c7399e4e87068ba91d9cec2001ee297f0a08c0
This is unfortunately a similar scenario that we saw play out with minswap (this one is slightly different due to the statements made by LF).
I would imagine many ADA holders on LF are in a tight spot to close their loans due to the price of ADA being low compared to the price last summer. However, had LF been honest about this vote last august, ADA holders could have left this platform more easily.
Now their Night is in the hands of LQ holders. This situation causes a conflict of interest. As ADA suppliers are the backbone of this platform, I do not see LiqwidFinance being around much longer after this insult.