Leaving the keys in ignition does not remove the blame from the thieve, but definitely attributes the owner to the not smart folk category. IRL such actions would void any insurance a car owner might have. Don’t see why those who can be reimbursed should wait for those who neglected to read the manual for the technology they use.
1 Like
I really don’t have the context for that? Do you mean the dev losing wallet.txt on desktop?
Or the users who lost thru the unlimited permission?
Let that be a mistery 
BTW my guess that it was not a wallet.txt, as devs could not be that stupid, but a deploy script like
const HDWalletProvider = require("@truffle/hdwallet-provider");
const Web3 = require(“web3”);
const mnemonicPhrase = “mountains supernatural bird…”; // 12 word mnemonic
let provider = new HDWalletProvider({
mnemonic: {
phrase: mnemonicPhrase
},
providerOrUrl: “http://localhost:8545”
});
1 Like
I think that is the fairest proposal up to now.
First of all, all affected people will have the same treatment. Splitting people that lost money due to the hack to groups will only worsen things.
Furthermore, having a debt token will help manage better the reimbursement and the sharing of potential recovered funds.
2 Likes
maybe we can combine a piece of audax his proposal and this one:
stakers/lenders who had ibzrx can easily 1:1 funded trough the treasury, since there where only be stolen 22m bzrx, excluding the developers bzrx. all others who suffered can have a depth token what jokerbra was proposing, if they are agree on that (details need to be made, buts a good start)
2 Likes
If some frozen funds are returned, stolen users should be compensated equally.
If only the hacker could return the funds, she should be able to keep 25%, and help DeFi.
Treasury could sell liquid assets to refund partially stolen users now. Then sell illiquid asset over time.
We should also distribute DAO tokens to all stolen users based on lost value at time of the hack. It could be a new token if treasury is not big enough. Future profits will pay back the loss.
Can the team clarify how much was stolen, and how much is current treasury.
I completely agree that there should be no division between the affected users. This proposal seems a lot more reasonable then the other one, however I’m not sure that a lot of the affected users will be interested in holding these tokens.
Having your funds stolen (especially if it is a large amount) is incredibly stressful. Since everyone is still investigating there is no solid info of the progress done and at the time of writing this post there is absolutely no info if everyone will be compensated 100% and when that will happen (making the situation even more stressful). Once there is a way out of this, I’m sure that the vast majorty of users will take their money and run. This has nothing to do with the integrity of the project, the capability of the team or anyithing like that. People will just want to have a peace of mind and end this nightmare.
However does not want to hold this token might sell it on the market for market price and is liquid again. Because of the incentives added there will be buyers of that debt - it will be a whole dollar in the end + the incentive rewards earned during this time.
Exactly what is the plan
Exactly, as you wish, you can leave your debt for a discount or wait to be whole again + reward.
2 Likes
Could we not create several debt tokens for each currency lost within the hack, of which even a bzrx debt token, but with the ability to vote in the dao.
Maybe make all these tokens non transferable except to bzx platform, sell 1%, or half a % of the treasury per day, buy a relative division of lost funds on the open market with the proceeds and allow people to reclaim their losses, all within a page similar to the farming platform we have seen in the past.
Id say include the teams losses in this process up to 50% of their loss, and the final 50% after everyone else is paid.
Keep a lower limit the treasury can get down to, in case funds are draining faster than we are repaying eveyone off, so we can continue to operate, and keep the protocol running, so that it is actually in a position to get the debt paid off, all whilst ,moving forward.
A slow and steady repayment, but a complete repayment overall, and everyone would know where they stand, rougly how long it should take, and just seems a fair effort.
Although the debt token wouldnt be incentivised, there may be a few people that could be incentivised to restake their compensation into the protocol to recoup their losses faster and also profit.
You could even kick things off with a 10% tresaury controlled sale and buy a load of tokens with the funds raised there… This could be being done right now on a daily basis to ease on sale pressure of bzrx
On a sidenote, lets assume all funds in the hack are gone forever, and any losses recouped would return straight to the treasury to be used in equal redistribution… Ie (should all usdt be recovered, we then use the usdt to buy equal shares of all tokens and coins, relative to the ratio of losses, and repay them as immediately as possible, so long as it doesnt crash the price of bzrx)
Hi! Thank you all for the contribution, ideas and feedback.
I think in general is a good idea under the circumstances, but looking to similar approaches to this done in past hacks (like cornichon in pickle) it seems so far it has not been very effective. What would be different in this case to have better results that cornichon? To put in context, in that case the missed amount was lower tha $20M, the cornichon token that represents a missed dai is worth $0.12 (and not over $0.15 in the last year), and in almost 1 (good-crypto) year after minting the token, only 19% could be burnt and and at current speed it will take 5 to 6 years to be able to burn all the cornichon.
For this case with more than $50M lost, if we do not take some more aggresive approach, we may need to wait until 2030 to get the funds back.
3 Likes
I like the Idea very much and I think bitfinex did the same in I guess 2015, when they suffered from a big loss.
They used to buy back the tokens with revenues and also all other participants were able to buy or sell there tokens anytime.
Within I guess one year bitfinex bought back all freefloating reaming tokens for 1 USD/ each.
I think also this is a possibility that could be implemented combined with other solutions for remaining losses.
This proposal is the fairest to everyone.
1 Like
I also support this proposal, as it’s fair to everyone involved. Moreover treasury could be used for aggressive marketing to attract more users.
This should be brought to a DAO alongside BadriNat’s proposal.
1 Like
I think this proposal is valid and can be implemented, but I think my proposal is better.
I have no objection to it being put up for a vote along with my proposal but I don’t think there is any way BZRX holders will vote for this over my proposal.
I have two reasons:
a) It’s a philosophical difference - I think the best approach is to put the health of the protocol first because the protocol’s success means everyone gets repaid faster. This proposal thinks it is better to damage the protocol (and long term BZRX holders) more now to put the balance in favour of the compensation in the short term. I disagree because I think it’s a short term measure and will harm both the protocol and the chances of full repayment over time in the long term.
b) More simply, it’s BZRX holders who need to vote for this, and this proposal is basically asking them to vote for shooting themselves in the face - it’s asking BZRX holders to vote directly against their own financial interests. Why would they do that? They are already being asked to vote on a proposal to compensate losses when they have no obligation to do that. If you don’t even give them their BZRX back, they will just vote against the proposal and no one gets anything.
The proposal needs to be something BZRX holders will pass (NOT all the people who lost money - they don’t get a vote)
Can anyone point me towards what can be done with the P125 token?
BadriNat with all my respects as you can see so far BZRX holders got their tokens back and they are just sitting on them without any movements on the platform to generate fees , without us P125 holders and our money there is not enough trades and liquidity , that means the platform should attract brand new users to start trade on the platform which will take a lot of time and there is very little chances that they could manage it regarding the past , so it ends up you BZRX holders are important for the platform equal as us with only difference that you are so ignorant and doesn’t allow P125 holders right to vote , you will end up sitting on 0 value of Ooki tokens as us sitting on P125
It’s easy to complain - what do you suggest be done? If you could vote, what would you do to drive trades and liquidity to the platform? That’s something we all want. Why would BZRX holders want to hold tokens for a platform that no one uses?
as I said the majority of the trades been done before the hack was from P125 holders , because most of the BZRX holders they just stake it for passive income , with the vote passed you cut off the people who was bringing profit to the platform , now we don’t have funds to keep trading. There should have been compensate all equal so part of the money recovered was going to be used back again in the platform for trades , also we should have been granted vote power for every decision being made regards the hack , don’t tell me exuses that it is DAO because if it was there was never going to have this conversation right now . Have a good day