Moonwell’s Plan Sparks Controversy as Users Debate the Use of Nomad Collateral to Address Frax Bad Debt

Current protocol reserves are inadequate to cover the bad debt.

Moonwell’s bad debt recovery plebiscite sparks user controversy.

📷

Moonwell, a decentralized finance (DeFi) borrowing and lending protocol, has found itself in the midst of a heated debate. The platform wants to use its $2.3 million worth of digital asset collateral to offset bad debt from its Frax Finance (FRAX) pools, which were affected by a hack almost two years ago. However, not all users are happy about this decision.

In a recent plebiscite titled “Options for Enhancing Liquidity in the FRAX Market on Moonbeam,” Moonwell sought approval from its community to use a combination of Nomad collateral and protocol reserves to address the Frax bad debt. The plebiscite received over 25 million votes in favor, denominated in the protocol’s WELL token, and passed its 10 million WELL quorum threshold with a support rate of over 98%. However, it’s worth noting that only 57 individuals or entities voted on the matter.

According to Horatio Lucas, one user who disagrees with the decision, the Nomad collateral in question belongs to individual owners and cannot be used to repay Moonwell’s Frax bad debt without their consent. Lucas alleges that Moonwell will be the primary beneficiary of funds that might be misappropriated, and questions why anyone can vote on the seizure of Nomad users’ funds, even if they don’t hold Nomad assets.

• How a Crypto Trader Made $6.77 Million in Three Hours with a Banana Gun
• Zero-Knowledge Proof Powered Layer-2 Blockchain Manta Network Faces DDoS Attack
• 🚀 dYdX’s Cosmos-based Market Takes the Lead in Trading Volume 📈

Although none of Lucas’ allegations have been proven in a court of law, they raise valid concerns about the use of collateral without consent. Moonwell partnered with the Nomad token bridge in 2022 for the integration of Bitcoin, Ethereum, stablecoins, and altcoins on its platform. However, the Nomad bridge was exploited in August 2022, resulting in a loss of $190.7 million, and impacting Frax Finance as well. Currently, Moonwell’s Frax-related bad debt amounts to $2.9 million.

The aftermath of the Nomad incident has left many unresolved issues, prompting Moonwell’s proposal. However, Lucas argues that the recent vote lacks legitimacy worldwide. To address dissenting voices, a Moonwell spokesperson emphasized that the snapshot vote was non-binding and merely aimed at gauging community sentiment. They stressed that a binding on-chain vote with a much higher quorum would be necessary to withdraw dormant Nomad assets from the Moonwell markets.

While users continue to debate the best course of action, it’s important to remember that Moonwell’s recovery from the Nomad incident is an ongoing process. Although the hack was perpetrated by attackers with nefarious intentions, some participants in the exploit actually intended to return the tokens. The Nomad bridge has since relaunched, albeit with diminished popularity.

It remains to be seen how Moonwell’s recovery plan will unfold, but the controversy surrounding the use of Nomad collateral to address Frax bad debt underscores the importance of community consensus and transparency in the DeFi space.

Q&A:

Q: What is Moonwell and what is its role in the DeFi space?

A: Moonwell is a DeFi borrowing and lending protocol that allows users to earn interest on their digital assets or borrow against them. The platform provides liquidity and facilitates the seamless trading of various cryptocurrencies.

Q: What happened during the Nomad exploit in 2022?

A: The Nomad bridge, which was integrated into Moonwell’s platform, was exploited in August 2022, resulting in a loss of $190.7 million. This exploit impacted not only Moonwell but also Frax Finance, causing significant financial losses and raising concerns about the security of decentralized financial systems.

Q: Why is there controversy surrounding the use of Nomad collateral to address Frax bad debt?

A: Some users, like Horatio Lucas, argue that the Nomad collateral belongs to individual owners and cannot be used without their consent to offset Moonwell’s Frax bad debt. This raises questions about the legitimacy of the recent vote and the rights of collateral owners in decentralized finance platforms.

Q: What is the significance of the recent plebiscite in Moonwell’s recovery plan?

A: The plebiscite served as a way for Moonwell’s community to express their opinion on using Nomad collateral and protocol reserves to address Frax bad debt. While the vote received overwhelming support, the controversy arises from concerns about the use of collateral without explicit consent from collateral owners.

Q: What is the outlook for Moonwell and the Nomad bridge?

A: Moonwell’s recovery from the Nomad incident is an ongoing process, and discussions surrounding the best path forward are still underway. The relaunch of the Nomad bridge, albeit with diminished popularity, indicates efforts to address the vulnerabilities that led to the exploit. It will be interesting to see how both Moonwell and the Nomad bridge adapt and improve in light of this incident.

Recommended Links:

1. “Next Major Ethereum Targets According to Model” – Blocking.net
2. “DogeCoin Volume Explodes 190%, DOGE Price Remains Low: What’s Going On?” – Blocking.net
3. “USDT and DOGE Holders Buying Massive Amounts of New ICO Token: Following Bitcoin’s 20000% ROI Yields?” – Blocking.net
4. “Hacker Returns Stolen Funds to Tender.fi, Gets $97K Bounty Reward” – Cyber Magazines

🔍 For more information on the Moonwell controversy, visit our recommended links above and stay tuned for updates as the situation unfolds!

📢 What are your thoughts on Moonwell’s plan? Share your opinion in the comments and don’t forget to like and share this article if you found it informative!

We will continue to update Blocking; if you have any questions or suggestions, please contact us!