Reimbursement - Final Plan (Re)

Reimbursement - Final reimbursement steps

Summary: This vote's goal is to counter vote the previous one that decided (pretty much undemocratically and out of the blue) that reimbursement will be in DAI over a period of 4 years.

Context: Rari Capital exposed on their website an ETH pool that clearly says: "safe returns for ETH". Meaning they took all the necessary precaution to make the pool risk free. Things cannot always go smoothly and a hacked occurred. No one could have predicted that and that's okay. Now, the team as repeated endlessly that they would worked hard to (and I quote this sentence) "make everyone whole". They also said that they would take this matter very seriously and in a matter of 2 days - even with unanswered questions (and still unanswered) about the vote and nature of the bonds on the forum - they pushed a vote that was ending 48 hours after. And I'll finally mention that there IS NOT a single person in the #solution channel on discord that wants to see the protocol reimbursement in neither DAI nor a 4 years timeframe. Both non-hacked and hacked people don't want that.

Side note: 257.7k RGT voted for a pass the stick strategy, meaning ETH for the hacked people + quick reimbursement. 195.4k RGT voted for the package A (75% of which being 2 addresses), meaning DAI for the hacked people + "whole" in 4 years.

Conclusion: This is starting to look bad for Rari. First I'm assuming that the team didn't vote. So we can consider that they either dont care or are fine with the output of the previous vote. They keep saying that they are just "user" of the platform and not in control of it BUT they don't vote. Or, gain, they were fine with the output of the previous vote. And on the assumption that they did vote, for package A, cause i'm assuming that they hold more than 30k of RGT - bigger voter of Package D got 28k RGT -, well that's even worst. Building a product, failing to make it safe and failing to make the hacked people whole. Man this doesn't look good and anyone with a good bag of RGT should be concerned about this. In addition, if they fail to properly handle the loss of 10 millions of $, I don't want to imagine how will they treat bigger issues.

Bottom line: At this day, the hack hasn't been taken seriously enough. Hacked people hasn't been taken seriously either. I'm all for Rari success but this doesn't look good if we reimburse hacked people in DAI over a 4 years time in such a fast paced environment. We are taking our own users for fools and that's not right. Blockchain should and need to be the next step to make the world a better place and that's not the right path.

This vote is assuming 2 things:

• Reimbursement of 100% of lost funds (Previously voted).
• Reimbursement in ETH (Most important thing).

I see 4 kind of possibility:

1 - Pass the Stick: Community member, Ben, has taken the lead on potentially developing a community multi-sig. This would be an additional DAO in addition to the one that is currently running. This option would delegate X $RGT (X=decided by governance later) to this multi-sig who is able to negotiate deals on the protocols behalf. Ben has already gotten 0xMaki, Anthony Sassano, Mariano.eth, CMS Holdings, Darren and Daryl Lau and Ric Burton on the multi-sig.

Traditional Bonds:

2 - Traditional Bonds, package A: Payment denomination: ETH Payment interval: Quarterly Multi-bond structure: Yes

• 1 small bond, reimburses small holders (defined as <=5 ETH in balance at the time of the hack, total bond amount equal to >160 ETH, ETH equivalent at time of exploit) in a 9 month bond.
• 1 normal bond with everything else that’s already defined in a 4 years bond.

3 - Traditional Bonds, Package B: Payment denomination: ETH Payment interval: Quarterly Multi-bond structure: No Maturity date: 4 years

4 - Don't change anything.