Refund LP Holders for the 2/11 Outage

I’ve seen this proposal request in the community.

On 2/11, the Avalanche network experienced a slowdown and LP PNG Rewards could not be distributed. A proposal could distribute ~175k PNG tokens to those affected by the outage.

21 Likes

sounds fair, i think its correct

6 Likes

Sounds fair to me too

6 Likes

Sounds fair.
As I understand it is PNGs that PGLs would have got if the outage hadn’t existed, so just puts the PNG issuing back on schedule.

5 Likes

I would agree to this.

5 Likes

Yup, seems like an easy decision.

4 Likes

this is awesome, accepted

3 Likes

Sounds reasonable. Totally not because I was affected. :eyes:

2 Likes

Can somebody please clarify what exactly was the damage done (as far as I knew the tokens were still safe) ?

The entire AVAX C-chain was frozen for two days, so PNG rewards did not generate properly and no fees were accrued. While no funds were actually lost, potential gains (projected PNG, possible trading profits, other staking rewards, etc) were paused. So to speak, nobody lost money, but they lost potential money.

2 Likes

Got it so it’s opportunity loss not actual monetary damages.

Next question!

Did this happen to everybody equally ? I.e. were everybody involved got affected equally and did it also prevent new users from being able to join in since the C-chain couldn’t actually process transactions ?

I was meaning to put liquidity in the pools, but the bridge and deposit to pools weren’t working. I had Avax in my Metamask wallet ready to be pooled.

I understand that my assets weren’t locked like those who had pairs in the pool, but I actually also suffered opportunity cost while waiting for the bridge and the pools deposits to be back on.

What about compensation for any Avax holder connected to the exchange since no one could put their liquidity in? Wouldn’t this be even more fair to the community?

Those who had liquidity in the pool could get more PNG per Avax than those who were only holding in Metamask since it’s proven they wanted to provide liquidity.

What do you guys think?

This would be incredibly hard to prove. I’d imagine this would open this proposal up to manipulation.

I agree, let’s do it- take 350k PNG from the airdrop leftovers and retroactively give it to all LPs proportional to their share on 2/11.

3 Likes

Ok so let’s get the information straight and summarize:

  1. The issue wasn’t pangolin specific, it was a protocol level issue that Ava-labs team had to work on day & night to solve

  2. The issue affected EVERYBODY equally, i.e. nobody had real monetary loss, and everybody that wanted to participate as a part of Pangolin couldn’t.

  3. It’s not clear to me how we would locate and prove all the folks who couldn’t move assets due to the issues. I don’t buy any of the arguments above:

  • Rewarding people with assets in Pangolin unfairly locks out folks who got stuck trying move in but couldn’t cause they were slightly slower to do so (i.e. their activity corresponded to after the C-chain locked up).
  • Rewarding people with assets on C-chain unfairly assumes they all wanted to participate :slight_smile:

Lastly, I want to make this point, I am part of the camp that got affected by the issues, and I don’t feel “entitled” to a reward.

There are no real damages done here, I know of NO product, company, team or business that compensates people for opportunity loss as the opportunity loss is usually un-quantifiable. This was a risk everybody took by being early adopters, and everybody knew there were risks. Brand new technology (let alone crypto based technology) is not a guaranteed money making source and it’s not even intending to be that. It’s all intended to make a part of our life (finance) better over the long term, rather than be a tool for a few individuals to make a quick buck.

Also, these are the exact type of supply printing means that degrade value of assets. On many levels, this would be no different than the government money-printing press all crypto enthusiasts complain about.

We, as the community, need to collectively get out of the “money grab” mentality, that is not the goal of Pangolin, or the PNG token or Avalanche.

Remember guys, it’s a marathon not a sprint.

In summary I’m vehemently opposed to creating random air-drops or selectively rewarding a sub group of the community.

17 Likes

No, that would be incredibly scammy. Just take the L and move on. It sets a bad precedent.

3 Likes

This sure feels like a cash grab to me without much of a tangible benefit to the Pangolin platform

3 Likes

I was one of the guy who effected that situation, We joined Pango with fully awareness of it’s new, some issues may occur, if some portion liquidity mining is not available on 2/11, I’m ready to wavier of my premium, better to burn those as well instead refunding early supporters.

8 Likes

Sounds fair to me too

3 Likes

Im all for it. Its a good use of the community coins.

2 Likes