Conversation

Whilst the $SWAG issue seems to have been not as problematic as first thought.

does have another issue/quirk that requires investigation and that relates to $MTA.

Quote Tweet

Oct 22, 2020

I don't think this lines up. 1) supply SWAG 2) borrow 3) temporarily crush SWAG 4) run away with funds 5) SWAG recovers ...all you've accomplished is selling your SWAG for a bad price. This isn't scamming CREAM, I think it ends up donating to it. Am I missing something? twitter.com/hasufl/status/…

Show this thread

The Crypto Cook

@gcolthup

Oct 22, 2020

Clearly someone borrowed the whole supply ahead of the recent TGE and helped contribute to the dump. Now as a party who placed $MTA into

@CreamdotFinance

I cannot retrieve it. This is complete nonsense.

The Crypto Cook

@gcolthup

Oct 22, 2020

I should be entitled to demand the collateral back immediately or have a mechanism to enforce the rate the borrower is paying to an astronomic level to force them to cover the position. Given current market conditions, any market buys in $MTA would likely lead to a strong rally

The Crypto Cook

@gcolthup

Oct 22, 2020

Would like to hear replies. I have been an active user of the platform and thought it had potential. But am now quite concerned.

@jronsim

Replying to

that's no different from how Compound works though. expected behavior IMO

Replying to

what should happen is that when utilization approaches 100%, interest rises a lot as well (how high depends on the curve being used)

Replying to

understood, but it appears to be capped at 108%. I mean that's a laughably low rate. Even the HKMA had to raise their rate to several hundred % to prevent a run and I can't say

@CreamdotFinance

has the credibility of the HKMA. Would expect it to be several thousand %

Replying to

yeah pretty standard for all the defi platforms, though also I agree that it's too low

4:56 AM · Oct 22, 2020Twitter Web App