No matter what the solution is, it has to be a solution that compensates the liquidated borrowers as best as possible as they lost everything even with a low liq price. The non-liquidated borrowers should get a compensation too as they had to sell other assets at a loss to save their position. However, they still maintained their position and have plenty of time now to plan accordingly after all warnings. All users have suffered but the liquidated borrowers obviously suffered the most as they are left with nothing. Those who don’t agree with that are maybe working for their self interest and not the truth. Even the loan of the liquidated many had to use to make ends meet but it wasn’t enough against the massive rebalancing. I wonder who made a big buck here with their liquidation bots. Seems fishy everything if I should be completely honest with you.
When using leverage in trading, the only thing that users should worry about is their liq price and plan risk management accordingly, which many did. When rebalancing both ways and high penelty fees also come into the equation, it gets very advanced and challenging. Let’s make A well CALCULATED refund to the victims and go on making this platform better for the future.
Hear, hear. We can argue semantics, terminology, and connotations all we want, but when it comes down to it, this is something that will make or break the reputation of Balanced going forward. Full effort should be given for the sake of ALL participants in the platform.
Hey folks - just a reminder to stay on topic. Anything off-topic will be removed. If you’d like to discuss a different topic, start a different thread. Thank you
The topic is about proposals on next steps for the borrower community.
FYI @Chiel@arch I’m speaking to community devs to pull debt balances of each account since your proposals hinge on that. However, there is no need to take their word for it. You can independently verify the data as well. Just wanted to keep you updated
Also, @Chiel@arch it would be helpful if you specify the specific snapshot day in which you’d like to take the debt value, or an average of several snapshot days. For example, you want debt numbers for day 269, 270, 271 and 272 averaged. Or, you want the debt at snapshot day 272 to be the number used to disburse the BALN incentives.
EDIT: Looks like Arch already included the days, however, getting the position every few hours is not possible to my knowledge, or at least not to the community devs i’ve spoken to. It can be gotten at snapshot day, once per day.
I feel truly sorry for everyone who got liquidated, but as a member of the DAO I must say that people who got liquidated are not valuable borrowers to balanced.
Borrowers are the main people helping bnUSD keep its peg. They do so by buying or selling sICX when needed, also known as rebalancing.
When you get liquidated, not only do you stop providing value as a borrower, you negatively affect the peg of bnUSD by having liquidators retire bnUSD for you.
By getting liquidated you also make the job of other borrowers harder; they now have to fill in for your role as well.
Claiming that the penalty fee isn’t displayed and is unreasonable is absurd.
This is how Balanced works, and you should know it.
From the point of Balanced, refunding people who were liquidated is in no way warranted.
Edit: The “liquidation penalty” fee can be very well seen as a fee for being a bad borrower and causing good borrowers to suffer unnecessary rebalancing.
Let me explain to you that its not a liquidation refund but a penalty fee refund. Just beeing in denial of the mentioned problems is interesting…
Above the proposals you need to explain why a refund for penalty fee is considered. Otherwise you get respsonses like the one im answering right now. @benny_options
Under normal circumstances you could argue that but the reason we discuss this is because the platform turned into a disaster in a matter of hours. People with liq price in the 40 cent range and perhaps lower got liquidated. People can’t spend all hours of their life watching what happens on Balanced. They trust that if their liq price is 40 cent then it won’t go to over 70 cent just like that.
The proposal of @arch doesnt adress the liquidation penalty refund but just wants to pay out the active holders. Therefore this proposal doesnt adress the subject and has to be removed!
We could have been done with this long ago if we just went with @particleX proposal from the start. He really tackled the root of the problem in my opinion.
The more I think about this proposal, the more I dislike it, respectfully. in essence it is proposing to take funds that came from the penalty fee paid by those liquidated and redistribute them to others who did not lose the fee.
I have to be blunt. If this proposal passes, it would look extremely scammy. I believe most people would get that impression, and it would really hurt the platform.
I agree we are continuing to prolong something that should already be set to be voted on. I get we want to here form everyone but I’m seeing more back and forth bickering at one another about how people are wording comments and saying how each other is wrong for feeling the way they do.
Not everyone is going to believe the same and view this the same but overall I still see majority of people all saying refund 1/3 of the liquidated amount at time of liquidation.
I feel with this being over a week it’s ready to go to a vote. It’s frustrating seeing This continuing to be dragged out.
From all of the proposals out now, this is the one I am most likely to support. I really didn’t think I’d like it. But the idea of supporting all accounts that have helped maintain the bnUSD asset in these tough times has grown on me.
That said, if a straight 18% fee adjustment was proposed, I would wholeheartedly be more in favour of that.
Not liquidated people cannot be refunded of a penalty fee they didnt occur. If yo uwant to do a Support appreciation proposal start a new discussion and dont do it with the funds of the liquidated users.
If you take only 30% of the emergency fund and 5% of the BALN from the DAO and divide it equally between all borrowers, everybody will get a little unsignificant share.
Here is why I think this is not a good proposal:
1: Most of the emergency fund is from the liquidated borrowers and should first and foremost be returned to them because of the error on this platform.
2: Distributing the funds equally between all borrowers makes no sense as a borrower of 1 bnusd gets just as much as a borrower of 100 000 bnusd. It should be a calculated and more sophisticated refund.
3: Only spending 30% of the emergency fund is way too little as a much bigger share of the emergency fund was built up by the liquidated borrowers between Jan 20th and Jan 24th.
4: The non-liquidated borrowers are favored over the liquidated borrowers, which is upside down given that the liquidated borrowers have funded the emergency fund.
@particleX proposal is the proposal I have supported from the start and if you would like the non-liquidated borrowers to get compensated, then go with @iconist proposal.
I agree with @Advocatus92 . The @arch proposal really belongs to a different thread. This thread is called “LIQUIDATION FEE DISCUSSION”. Hence, this thread should actually only contain proposals for the liquidated borrowers. Anything other is off topic and should be removed.