Jump to content

Songbird SGB airdrop-FLARE NETWORK


Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, Seoulite said:

Who the hell writes dear in a customer service chat? So weird.

Anyway I don't think the exchange is actually under any legal obligation to distribute the tokens. The spark airdrop there were agreements signed. Songbird had no such agreements, and so I don't think there is any legal issue here. I've also seen Hugo on Discord say something very similar. 

I agree with you. It is poor decision by Flare team. Songbird is different network than FN. They could have different snapshot date. It passed like 2 months from announcement of SGB and "release". Everyone would have enough time to prepare for the snapshot.

I can completely understand the exchanges. It is not just "distribute the coins". They still have to do security check, check for  a demand, intergrade to their platform. This all costs and exchanges pay lots of money to their developers. Seriously, why would they spend money so people can just dump "their" tokens straight away? We have no idea how popular SGB will be. We can only guess. 

FN put exchanges in a really bad position. Now they have to deal with the mess FN caused. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beware everyone of scams about Songbird. Never input your seed phrase anywhere.

Also if you have connected to Songbird via a ledger and MetaMask then you can just use your ledger to transfer the tokens out into another MetaMask address, then you don’t need to keep connecting your ledger to access your tokens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Seoulite said:

Who the hell writes dear in a customer service chat? So weird.

Binance is founded by ZHAO C.P. who is a Chinese. I know it’s weird, but the customer service of TAOBAO (the Amazon of China) always call their customers “dear”. 
 

3 hours ago, Seoulite said:

and so I don't think there is any legal issue here. I've also seen Hugo on Discord say something very similar. 

I doubt about it. No law has confirmed that it would be against the law to not to distribute the tokens to their customers. But neither does the law say it’s ok for these exchanges to keep these tokens they received on behalf of their customers to themselves. 
 

Maybe a lawsuit or many lawsuits will give this area some clarity. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Kiwi said:

FN put exchanges in a really bad position. Now they have to deal with the mess FN caused. 

I agree with you on this part. But I will still be grateful because I might receive two types of tokens from them. They are not perfect but they did their best.

5 hours ago, Kiwi said:

I can completely understand the exchanges. It is not just "distribute the coins". They still have to do security check, check for  a demand, intergrade to their platform. This all costs and exchanges pay lots of money to their developers. Seriously, why would they spend money so people can just dump "their" tokens straight away? We have no idea how popular SGB will be. We can only guess. 

This is very biased and I feel pretty offended.
1. I never plan to dump my SGB once I received them. I have hold my XRP for a very long time. 

2. I understand the situation of the exchange and I’ll wait until an official statement comes out.

3. There ARE exchanges who support SGB. What makes these exchanges look better than the exchanges who decided to make the extra effort to address the issues of their customers?  Because they decided to avoid some cost and trouble? 

4.Even though I didn’t plan to sell SGB if I received them, I don’t have a problem of the others selling these tokens. There are “dumps” because there are willing buyers. And these buyers will likely get a decent price. In addition if these tokens were not in the exchange users’ hands, who can stop the exchange from dumping the tokens?  IMHO, it’s not for the exchange to decide their customers don’t deserve these SGB because all they want to do is to sell the tokens they receive. They don’t have that right I think.

Edited by lizshadehdg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, lizshadehdg said:

This is very biased and I feel pretty offended.

I didn't quote you and I do not care if you are offended or not.

6 hours ago, lizshadehdg said:

In addition if these tokens were not in the exchange users’ hands, who can stop the exchange from dumping the tokens?

It is their tokens, they can do what they want. Everyone who kept their tokens on CEXs learned their lesson. Not your keys not your tokens. 

Every exchange has terms and condition, perhaps people will read it read it next time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Kiwi said:

It is their tokens, they can do what they want. Everyone who kept their tokens on CEXs learned their lesson. Not your keys not your tokens. 

Every exchange has terms and condition, perhaps people will read it read it next time.

This was exactly the reason I pulled my XRP off Coinbase before the airdrop and set up the distro keys myself. No one knew that $SGB was going to be a thing, probably not even FN until this summer, as is evidence by their weird, last minute 'super-awesome-surprise' announcement.

Coinbase didn't even want to hand out BitcoinCash when it forked from BTC, the top dog. If the exchanges really wanted to, they could probably hoard all the SGB they got and 'dump' it a la Jed McCaleb, nothing stops them from doing so. Of course this is the exact thing FN was trying to deter with their FLR release schedule. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Kiwi said:

I didn't quote you and I do not care if you are offended or not.

It is their tokens, they can do what they want. Everyone who kept their tokens on CEXs learned their lesson. Not your keys not your tokens. 

Every exchange has terms and condition, perhaps people will read it read it next time.

As much as I can see it sucks for people not getting tokens, I understand some exchanges not making the effort. Songbird was not part of the original plan. It is value created out of thin air and exchanges made no agreement to give any more value to people than the flare airdrop. 

Think of it this way: if flare decided to create 1000 canary networks each with their own token, and people would be demanding exchanges cater to them. They wouldn’t. Now this is just one canary network but the principle is the same. Everything costs time and money.

We all need to remember also that so many exchanges including the big boys supporting the flare airdrop was unprecedented and a minor miracle in itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Kiwi said:

I didn't quote you and I do not care if you are offended or not.

It is their tokens, they can do what they want. Everyone who kept their tokens on CEXs learned their lesson. Not your keys not your tokens. 

Every exchange has terms and condition, perhaps people will read it read it next time.

No one need to be lectured by your mean words.  They are not helpful either. 

If you didn’t comment in the topic I created, I don’t even bother to respond either.

It’s a free world. Comment whatever you want.  My conversation with you ends here. Good luck with your future. May you be treated the same way when you are asking help or suggestions somewhere else.

I migrated my wallet from Ripple trade to Gatehub in 2015. Did they have terms and conditions regarding this type of airdrop? I can’t remember or I didn’t  really understand how it works then. 
 

Not my keys? Why my keys were not given to me when I claimed my FLR. Because I used Gatehub’s built in method and they decided not to give my keys. But I will still get my FLR eventhough I don’t have my keys. With so many clueless users participating in airdrops, I would say a disclaimer will be much better.


 

 

Edited by lizshadehdg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Seoulite said:

As much as I can see it sucks for people not getting tokens, I understand some exchanges not making the effort. Songbird was not part of the original plan. It is value created out of thin air and exchanges made no agreement to give any more value to people than the flare airdrop. 

Think of it this way: if flare decided to create 1000 canary networks each with their own token, and people would be demanding exchanges cater to them. They wouldn’t. Now this is just one canary network but the principle is the same. Everything costs time and money.

We all need to remember also that so many exchanges including the big boys supporting the flare airdrop was unprecedented and a minor miracle in itself.

Thank you my friend. You have been very helpful.

I understand your point. I know the importance of trying to avoid exceptions. But my point here is there are going to be things like this in the future (IMO) as well. 
 

Is there truly no other way to address this issue than the users get airdrop for free if the exchange supports it and others get nothing if their exchange does not? 

Do users have to learn about how the crypto works in such a hard way and in such a large scale?

BTW given that most exchanges haven’t posted their statement about SGB,  it is better for users just to express their concern and let exchanges do their job. Actually these exchanges are considering this IMHO:

10206179-8DB6-467B-81C9-F82C75D964F7.thumb.jpeg.1f76789b1bbedbdc01bda445f7fcaab2.jpeg

Edited by lizshadehdg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lizshadehdg said:

Is there truly no other way to address this issue than the users get airdrop for free if the exchange supports it and others get nothing if the exchange does not? 

I’m afraid the answer to your question is probably no, since there is literally no other way for the network to identify the owner of a token beyond the controller of the corresponding private key.

Whenever we use exchanges we are using them as a middleman between us and the network. Not your keys not your crypto is a blunt and way to say it but it is how it has always been said. I’ve written elsewhere on this forum that old timers had this driven into our brains, along with a distrust of exchanges. That faded as exchanges became more legit and developed but the truth remains. 

I describe it to people this way: in a sense, the private key IS your crypto. The only way to control your crypto 100% is to control your private key.

I took my xrp off exchanges to claim flare, not because I thought this kind of thing would happen, but just because as I said earlier in the back of my mind I preferred doing it myself than trusting an exchange. Having said that, I trust exchanges with a lot of my value right now. I don’t know, as I said I’m sorry it’s happening to people. But I think there is no other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, lizshadehdg said:

Thank you my friend. You have been very helpful.

I understand your point. I’m a school teacher. I know the importance of trying to avoid exceptions. But my point here is there are going to be things like this in the future as well. 
 

Is there truly no other way to address this issue than the users get airdrop for free if the exchange supports it and others get nothing if the exchange does not? 

Do users have to learn about how the crypto works in such a hard way and in such a large scale?

 


Your point about difficulty of knowing and the hard lessons is correct.  Crypto right now is as user friendly as a cornered rat.  :) 

 

It’s got a steep learning curve and traps abound.  It’s better than it was in earlier years though,  and I think that trend will continue.

The important thing to remember here is that the reason we are able to do so well out of crypto (if we ever do) is because it’s difficult and early.  Once things become clearer and easier,  the potential gains will likely ease off at a similar rate to the difficulties.

 

The exchanges will perhaps be persuaded to distribute if there is enough users clamouring for it.  But legally I think they have no obligation.  Let’s hope they want the good will.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Seoulite said:

I’m afraid the answer to your question is probably no, since there is literally no other way for the network to identify the owner of a token beyond the controller of the corresponding private key.

Whenever we use exchanges we are using them as a middleman between us and the network. Not your keys not your crypto is a blunt and way to say it but it is how it has always been said. I’ve written elsewhere on this forum that old timers had this driven into our brains, along with a distrust of exchanges. That faded as exchanges became more legit and developed but the truth remains. 

I describe it to people this way: in a sense, the private key IS your crypto. The only way to control your crypto 100% is to control your private key.

I took my xrp off exchanges to claim flare, not because I thought this kind of thing would happen, but just because as I said earlier in the back of my mind I preferred doing it myself than trusting an exchange. Having said that, I trust exchanges with a lot of my value right now. I don’t know, as I said I’m sorry it’s happening to people. But I think there is no other way.

Thank you for your explanation. I know there is no other way for the network to recognize the owner of the token FOR NOW( technology is making progress, let’s have some confidence in our dear developers) 

But the exchange does know who owns these tokens and if they bother to distribute them is another question. For a stock exchange, it does not have similar problem such as stock holders suddenly are dropped another stock. 

Exchanges are running a business. I don’t think the exchange which support SGB is purely being generous and caring about their customers. No matter I receive my SGB in the end or not, I still feel in order for these crypto exchange to become really serious business, they need to consider how to properly address these unique issues and I NEVER said the exchange users should get every airdrop for free if that cost the exchange a lot. 
 

But this is out of my control. I’m just thinking.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, BillyOckham said:


It’s got a steep learning curve and traps abound.  It’s better than it was in earlier years though,  and I think that trend will continue.

The important thing to remember here is that the reason we are able to do so well out of crypto (if we ever do) is because it’s difficult and early.  Once things become clearer and easier,  the potential gains will likely ease off at a similar rate to the difficulties.

I totally agree and thank you for your insight. I never think about it this way. People who bought an considerable amount of any coin in the early stage have made a fortune now even though they don’t know anything about the crypto.

56 minutes ago, BillyOckham said:

The exchanges will perhaps be persuaded to distribute if there is enough users clamouring for it.  But legally I think they have no obligation.  Let’s hope they want the good will.

I agree with you that the exchange might have no legal obligation to support SGB. But legally who are these SGB belong to?

If there is no specific law to protect the exchange users on this airdrop thing, there is no law to protect the exchange either. (Maybe I’m wrong. I am happy to learn more tho) 
 

And yes, I agree what the exchange is considering : is it worth it?

Thank you again. :)
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, lizshadehdg said:

But legally who are these SGB belong to?

Its about possession of the key (the ability to do something with the crypto).

If the key is not known by anyone then it’s effectively black-holed.  If the address is publicly known to have no known key then it’s provably black-holed.

But the exchanges DO have the key to the SGB accounts.  They are the same keys as they will be using to distribute Flare.  So I think they might be considered the owner by law. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gatehub stated in their Flare distribution papers, that they will be doing so via IOU.

They created individual accounts, gave them public keys, but kept private keys, to know to who distribute what amounts.....

It is doubtful, they release private keys to owners of accounts (time will tell)

 

With IOU distribution, they are making fees, just like their other IOU wallets/trading (Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc.....)

For them, should be no problem to create another IOU for songbird issued from another XRPL address......

They still make money on fees.....

:cray:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.