FTSOs receiving and dumping FLR before TDE

[xrp-nuke]

3 hours ago, BillyOckham said:

For clarity….    Not all, or even many, of the ‘cool’ (to use your term) FTSO’s dumped.  Only a small number broke the agreement, and it’s sounding as though they will be penalised.

There was no agreement, it was feck up from Hugo who wants put responsibility of his poor decision and lazyness onto weakest participants: FTSO providers. Not exchanges or whatsoever.

Its a market at the end of the day.

 

By the way it seems FLR is so centralised?

[BillyOckham]

5 minutes ago, xrp-nuke said:

It obvious with any alike tokenomics BS nowadays

Please assume I know nothing and explain this obvious point.  I’m tired of unsupported claims left right and centre about everything on the internet.

 

If you want to make a claim,  demonstrate the reasoning or you are just noise.

It’s entirely possible the claim is correct.  But as an outsider looking in, with no reasoning behind the claims,  how do I know they are anything except noise?

And just to avoid red herrings….   here is the claim again:

”For example that remaining 85% of FLR that was intended for XRP snapshot recipients now will end up mostly in the hands of FLR whales.”

 

 

[BillyOckham]

On reflection,  looking at the claim again,  I can see that it can be interpreted multiple ways.

 

I took it to mean that there would be an unfair advantage in the distribution to anyone who is a whale.  I can’t see how that is true,  hence my questions.

But you could read it to say that after a fair distribution the whales will have received the largest portion.  And that is obviously true, but is not at all unfair.  It’s just the result of maths.  If you have a big portion of the wrapped FLR then you will receive a corresponding large portion of the rewards.

Just thought I should clarify these two different interpretations in the hope that the claimants will identify which interpretation they refer to.

 

[Gringo]

(I see there are many post on this thread from an account that I put on the ignore list sometime ago, so apologies in advance if I am duplicating info).

It seems there are more findings from "OZ Crypto". Hugo is not that smart as he think he is. He can't control the entire social internet if there is a smoking gun, it will be known sooner or later by the general public.

 

[BillyOckham]

9 minutes ago, Gringo said:

(I see there are many post on this thread from an account that I put on the ignore list sometime ago, so apologies in advance if I am duplicating info).

It seems there are more findings from "OZ Crypto". Hugo is not that smart as he think he is. He can't control the entire social internet if there is a smoking gun, it will be known sooner or later by the general public.

 

I see he has me on ignore.  But for others reading…

 

This laundry list of big movements reminds me very much of earlier Ripple fund moves that were widely misinterpreted to much hooha by people eager for clicks.  Next month, like every month, there will be YouTube guys chasing Adsense dollars after highlighting the Billion XRP dump incoming based on wallet moves.  Sigh.

Perhaps there are bad things in there,  but just showing a list of large movements doesn’t prove anything.  Can we please head towards a situation where claims have supporting arguments?

I feel it’s likely there was incompetence and greed from players ignoring the agreements they had made as part of this fiasco.  But that does not a conspiracy make.  And sadly,  incompetence in crypto nearly seems the norm.

So..  if anyone has an actual argument and evidence…. I’m very interested.

@ftso_au is basically badmouthed in that Twitter thread quoted by @Gringo but anyone who has followed this on here since the beginning knows FTSO AU is a responsible player doing a lot of community engagement and good in this space.  
 

There clearly is an issue,  but let’s hear the arguments and let’s not just throw crap in the air.  Make logical supported points or you are just noise.

 

[Gringo]

Tom T keeps building his reputation as the most inept community manager of the cryptosfere. 

source: https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/flare/

 

[xrp-nuke]

1 hour ago, BillyOckham said:

On reflection,  looking at the claim again,  I can see that it can be interpreted multiple ways.

 

I took it to mean that there would be an unfair advantage in the distribution to anyone who is a whale.  I can’t see how that is true,  hence my questions.

But you could read it to say that after a fair distribution the whales will have received the largest portion.  And that is obviously true, but is not at all unfair.  It’s just the result of maths.  If you have a big portion of the wrapped FLR then you will receive a corresponding large portion of the rewards.

Just thought I should clarify these two different interpretations in the hope that the claimants will identify which interpretation they refer to.

 

I had 100000 XRP

I was told I get 100000 FLR

15% at start and rest 85% over N number of months (I think it was 36?)

Than Flare changed the game.

So I ask you a question, how many months I need to stake 15k FLR to claim my 85k back?

Now take whales, exchanges and others who got millions of FLR, they will eat bigger slice of pie. There is no even distribution, more tokens you have bigger reward you get.

[Gringo]

Quote

So I ask you a question, how many months I need to stake 15k FLR to claim my 85k back?

You can't know for sure, any whale will eat from that pie too.

[BillyOckham]

1 hour ago, xrp-nuke said:

I had 100000 XRP

I was told I get 100000 FLR

15% at start and rest 85% over N number of months (I think it was 36?)

Than Flare changed the game.

So I ask you a question, how many months I need to stake 15k FLR to claim my 85k back?

Now take whales, exchanges and others who got millions of FLR, they will eat bigger slice of pie. There is no even distribution, more tokens you have bigger reward you get.

Ah.  You are not saying they have an unfair distribution, just that it’s changed and you now think you will get less than you would have.

Welcome to crypto.

 

[Gringo]

Quote

Bitrue was unaware of any potential grants or pre-TDE transfers of FLR.

 

[xrp-nuke]

10 hours ago, BillyOckham said:

Ah.  You are not saying they have an unfair distribution, just that it’s changed and you now think you will get less than you would have.

Welcome to crypto.

 

Dont see why it can not be categorised as unfair, especially with Flare case.

[Montoya]

A bit of irony to post a tweet that criticizes Hugo for blocking a person who criticizes them on twitter....when you have people blocked on here who ostensibly have criticized you... Just saying....

[Gringo]

Quote

.when you have people blocked on here who ostensibly have criticized you.

I didn't block anyone here, I put on the "ignore list". This means that person can continue to put names on me but I am not able to read. That person can continue to read what I write. Also when I (last year) had to resort to that action, was so that I could focus on posting information here instead of having to lose my time with someone acting as a "proxy" to Flare team (I don't even care if that person is on their payroll or not).

Flare Network has already their own social spaces when they can put their narrative and REALLY block users (not put on ignore). This forum is independent from them and alltough we can't as users block people, at least we can partially "retribute" them. If some day that guy "Tom T" ever appears on this Forum I wont lose any second of my time with him, I will put him on the "ignore list" as well.

So no irony here: ignore list is not the same as blocking. And by the way, all what we "suspected" some month ago has become a reality now. So I am more than proud for staying laser focus on this issues instead of losing it by means of nonsense posts.

 

[BillyOckham]

2 hours ago, Gringo said:

instead of having to lose my time with someone acting as a "proxy" to Flare team (I don't even care if that person is on their payroll or not).

Wow.   Just wow.