User Protection, Limits iAsset 200% or 250%

@mannymacfly He thought he found a protocol vulnerability and demanded payment like it was a bug bounty. The Lab encouraged him to test his theory on testnet. He did and the protocol showed resilience and performed as designed. He continued to make accusations and make demands in discord until he got frustrated and left. A few hours later I saw him in Minswap discord making crazy accusations and demands. Just that type of troll I guess.

He asked for payment for a finding without providing evidence and then unexpectedly said he didn’t want to part of the community. Apparently though he’s back in the Forum. So maybe he just meant he left Discord.

I don’t believe anybody is attacking you personally. There have been calls to provide evidence to back your proposal. It’s reasonable to expect evidence for a new proposal, especially one that impacts the core mechanics of the protocol.

The protocol already supports users to open positions at 200%. The average CR is above 200%. Forcing every user to have a certain CR disincentivizes arbitrageurs and could reduce Indigo’s liquidity. This forced “user protection” could be justified if there was a proven benefit that could be added to the system. There are already protections in place for users, and users are responsible for their own positions. As it seems right now, this proposal is a solution looking for a problem. The system isn’t broken, so why try and make a major change that discourages users.

As for the testnet, you tried to attack it and your attack failed. There’s no conspiracy or manipulation. You had a theory, put it to the test, and the result is that the theory is invalid.

These discussion are very much appreciated. I hope you stick around for the future and continue to help make Indigo stronger.