MIP-017: Final MPL Conversion Window and Strategic Use of Unconverted Tokens

[Sha]

Additional feedback on why this final conversion window is an excellent decision for the protocol and community:

I also want to say that I believe this final window benefits not only late converters like myself, but also the Maple protocol and the entire community, including those who converted on time.

Here’s why:
1. Strengthening Maple’s reputation and community trust
By showing care and fairness towards long-term holders who may not track markets and social channels daily, Maple further establishes itself as a responsible and ethical project. That loyalty and goodwill are priceless in the long run.
2. Positioning Maple as a platform for long-term investors
This decision sends a strong signal that Maple is not just for speculators or fast movers, but also values those who believe in the company and quietly hold for years. This makes Maple even more attractive to institutional and long-term investors.
3. Improved market liquidity and token circulation
The more MPL holders convert to SYRUP, the fewer inactive “dead” MPL tokens will remain locked and out of circulation. This improves overall liquidity and clarity of token supply.
4. Creating a sense of fairness and alignment
The decision ensures that both active and passive holders are treated fairly, reinforcing Maple’s strong community-driven ethos and values.
5. Turning a potentially negative experience into a positive one
Instead of leaving many frustrated holders behind, Maple has created an opportunity to turn them into grateful long-term supporters. This is an excellent example of customer-first thinking in crypto.

Thank you once again for this thoughtful decision.

[Richi86]

I want to raise a serious concern regarding the proposal to extend the MPL-to-SYRUP conversion.

If this extension goes forward without strict controls, it appears that anyone can now purchase MPL on a DEX, where it’s trading far below SYRUP’s current price, and convert it for an instant, risk-free profit. We’re not talking about helping genuine long-term holders here. We’re talking about opening the floodgates to arbitrageurs, bots, and opportunists who had no prior involvement in the project.

Just look at current prices: if someone buys MPL at $2 and is allowed to convert it to SYRUP at current valuations, that’s a 10x–20x return with zero actual commitment to the ecosystem. That’s not fairness, it’s an exploit.

This raises several urgent questions:
• Will there be technical safeguards to ensure only wallets that held MPL prior to the original April 30 deadline are eligible to convert?
• If not, how does the team plan to prevent new buyers from abusing this system?
• Is the proposal unintentionally creating a massive arbitrage opportunity?
• Has anyone done the math on how many MPL tokens are still in circulation and vulnerable to this type of abuse?

This cannot be the intent of the proposal. If we extend the conversion window without strict eligibility filters, the only beneficiaries will be traders and speculators—not long-term supporters.

I urge the Maple team to clarify immediately whether this type of exploitation will be technically possible, and if not, to explain the safeguards in place.

If this cannot be prevented, then I strongly oppose the proposal. It risks undermining both tokenomics and trust in Maple’s governance process.

[Xmd]

If this is true, that someone could buy MPL on a DEX for pennies and then convert it to SYRUP at full value—then this proposal opens the door to massive abuse.

That cannot be the purpose of this exercise. The whole idea was to help genuine holders who missed the window, not reward opportunists with a 10–20x arbitrage opportunity.

Maple team, can you please confirm that this will not be allowed? Are there technical safeguards in place to prevent fresh MPL buys from being eligible for conversion if the window is reopened? If not, how will this be controlled?

This needs to be addressed clearly, because right now, it looks like it could be exploited heavily.
If the vote proposal is put up the we should allow only people who bought before march to convert…

[RPP]

It seems that if the conversion is extended, only hackers & traders will benefit. Just look at the price of mpl on dex. If we buy mpl at $1.2, we will get a profit as much as 20x (if converted to $syrup).
The second point, this will make the public ask about the team’s consistency in making a decision.
Conclusion, the maple team should pay more attention to the interests of more people (people who always see product updates & have also converted $syrup). Not everyone will be happy with your decisions, but at least you have good consistency & credibility.

[min]

As a long-time supporter of Maple Finance, I’ve been shocked by all the negativity I’ve been seeing in Twitter, Telegram, and this forum in the past week. Clearly it’s stemming from the MPL-SYRUP conversion deadline. The facts are that a lot of MPL holders (11% of MPL) didn’t convert, lost their stake in the Maple ecosystem, and feel betrayed by this high-quality project. Reopening the conversions would be a step in the right direction to heal these wounds and move forward. Maple has such a bright future, let’s do the right thing and let all of our token holders prosper.

[ZooTv]

Only insiders closely following the project would even be aware that this window is reopening. If the concern is managing market reactions by adding restrictions, then things are about to get very messy. Trying to define who counts as a rightful Maple holder will be highly subjective and difficult to enforce. Technically implementing this kind of filter comes with cost, complexity, and risk. Now you’re also introducing new logic into the converter that would require a fresh audit just to ensure the process is secure and not exploitable. This turns what should have been a simple goodwill gesture into an expensive technical liability.

[min]

To add to my previous post, here is a chain of three comments here on the forum from unhappy MPL holders: MIP-011: MPL Conversion to End 30th of April 2025 - #7 by Mattryx78

Twitter has hundreds of posts like this one, with users commenting whenever MPL or SYRUP are mentioned. https://x.com/matsanchez_/status/1920513660683784426

It seems to me that having a deadline to convert MPL to SYRUP was a mistake. We can fix the mistake by reopening conversions and let every MPL holder continue to be a part of this project.

[ZooTv]

Labeling all late converters as bad actors is misleading.

@RPP

only hackers & traders will benefit.

[kidgremlin]

Gotta be frank.

This discussion, and the philosophy of the “you must follow rules camp” is pretty shocking, and, long-term, feels like a risky business decision.

11.5% of MPL tokens were not converted. That’s millions of dollars invested by people who, for whatever reason, believed in the project: early supporters. But the immediate response seemed to be “tough luck; follow the rules; there are no exceptions.”

Now, as a project, I believe that if you want to participate in major retail trading markets (see: Coinbase)-- and enjoy the growth in token value that comes with that – you have a responsibility to those less sophisticated (i.e. less twitter reading, discord using, internet living) investors and treat them appropriately. 11.5% of tokens were not converted. To me, that reads as a failure in communication, rather than a failure to “follow the proposal of the DAO.” If proposals like that, which exclude major investment classes, are going to exist: one, it makes me doubt the long-term feasibility of this project. Two, I think you bear a responsibility not to participate in major retail exchanges. You have passive buyers like me, who work multiple jobs, have multiple kids, invest in long-term, interesting projects, and checked in on May 5th to see what looked like a rug pull.

Terrible way to build long-term trust in investors. And, legally, it feels like you’re opening risky doors. (I’m not a lawyer, I just know when people lose money in what feel like unfair ways, it often doesn’t end well).

I understand preventing arbitrage in purchasing MPL on a DEX and reaping profit (though this is a financial market game as long as there have been markets). But to me that’s either something to swallow for a bungled conversion, or something to prevent through technical stuff I don’t understand. Personally, I don’t understand why you would limit conversion to a 48 hour window rather than open it up indefinitely.

And what’s interesting… I’m probably more active than a big chunk of the 12.5% non-converted MPL. I found this proposal and discovered there may be a 48-hour window to convert. I imagine a lot of people will still go unconverted and when they realize it, they’ll feel like they’re waking up to something that looks like a rug pull.

I’d put pressure on Coinbase (and any other exchanges) to bother investors with this information. Multiple times.

All said, I’m glad something is potentially being done, but after seeing the immediate response, I felt disappointed, disillusioned, and led to believe this was a less serious project than I imagined.

[ZooTv]

First, it’s not pennies, that’s an exaggeration.

Second, calling this “exploitation” misunderstands how markets work. Arbitrage isn’t abuse—it’s a natural, healthy mechanism that corrects price discrepancies. If MPL is undervalued on DEXs, and there’s a pathway to SYRUP at higher value, the market will respond. That’s not gaming the system; that is the system.

Trying to overengineer this with wallet filters, timestamps, or eligibility rules only opens the door to real exploits. You’ll need to audit the contract changes, verify the snapshot integrity, and test for edge cases—each of which introduces complexity, cost, and risk. One bad assumption or bug could do more harm to SYRUP holders than any arbitrage trade ever could.

Let’s not pretend that adding bureaucracy preserves fairness. It just raises the chance of something breaking. Keep it simple, fair, and transparent. The market will sort itself out.

[Kraftcap]

This is not how markets work my friend. If there truly is MPL trading at a discount somewhere that is actually liquid, then the price would reflect the probability of the governance passing. There is no free lunch in the market.

[bellonoff]

Think that this is a very relevant concern, looking at the #4 wallet holding unconverted MPL, that has multiplied its MPL position from 6.2K at the conversion deadline to 46.1K now (see here).

To prevent arbitrageurs using the conversion extension to effectively acquire SYRUP at 10-20% of its current price (at the expense of existing SYRUP holders and uninformed, unconverted MPL holders), the new window (if voted) should be restricted to a whitelist with wallets and MPL balances held as of the conversion deadline (Apr 30th).

For a more detailed discussion, here are the different MPL holder groups (ranked by MPL held, more details in this this Dune dashboard).

Some comments:

1. Biggest holders of unconverted MPL are CEXs (with 3.4% of unconverted MPL, almost all from Coinbase).
2. There are 814 size holders with 100-1K MPL that hold 2.1% of unconverted MPL.
3. ~90% of unconverted MPL holders are small (with 10-100 MPL, 1% of MPL) or very small (with less than 10 MPL, 0.1% of MPL, 58% of all unconverted MPL holders).

[ZooTv]

The real concern isn’t arbitrage, it’s the added complexity of whitelisting. Yes, onchain data makes tracking wallet balances possible, but turning that data into a functional, error-free whitelist requires smart contract changes. That means more development, more auditing, and more chances for mistakes. What happens if an eligible wallet is left out? Or if someone used a CEX and can’t prove ownership? Suddenly, we’re dealing with appeals, delays, and new exceptions—ironically creating the very mess we were trying to avoid.

And let’s not forget: if someone is on the whitelist, they can still buy cheap MPL and convert it. So now you’ve just created a smaller pool of people allowed to arbitrage—and called it a “safeguard.”

Plus, what about the people who sold their MPL because they thought the conversion window had closed for good? They may want to buy back at a discount and convert too.

Let’s not overcomplicate this. Reopen the conversion or don’t. But whitelisting invites more friction than it prevents.

[necasworld]

I’ve been reading comments on Telegram, and it seriously hurts to see what’s out there. Please stop assuming that people don’t care about the project just because we weren’t aware of the conversion. This was my 5th largest investment, nearly 1k MPL, and I missed the deadline due to serious health reasons. Flying to Germany, Ireland, countless sleepless nights in hospitals, and still my hands and legs are getting paralyzed. I might not walk in the future, and crypto is literally my retirement money. Can you imagine how hard it is to keep this crypto lifestyle when things go wrong? Please stop being so cold-hearted. Stop judging like we killed somebody and no second chances are given. I have invested so much time in crypto over 7 years, and Maple was and still is my 5th biggest position. I found it, I loved it, I invested a freaking 10k into it. Now, while I’m battling with my Lyme and didn’t look at Twitter for a while, my tokens have been taken from me just like that. They’re nearly worthless now. What I read seems many of us long-term holders are in the same boat. Punished, not needed, “get lost.” “We take their money and airdrop to us” “so my bags grow.” “Because we converted on time,” “f them.” This is the sentiment I see in some of you, perhaps not the exact words. I can’t believe what I read in comments. Where is the humanity? Imagine if that were your mom, dad, or any close family member in the same situation. Wouldn’t you help them? I have no job now. If I lose this huge chunk of money, this hole will literally stay with me for the rest of my life. Do any of you “who so selfishly talk like kids” understand that it’s hard-earned money we invested? I placed $10k into Maple. And now I will be left with nothing. You “community” treat us like some kind of criminals, like we don’t deserve a second chance for missing a deadline. I had no idea about the conversion. I’m so sorry I was worried about my health more. I found out, like others, when my portfolio tanked overnight. You guys need to help us. What happened isn’t right. But there is still a way to help people like myself and many others. Why would the “community” look away and not help? I didn’t get my MPL for free; I bought it, same as you, with my sweat and tears, working for over 20 years until I couldn’t. I only ask for what I feel is fair. Now, because some of you don’t feel like voting in favour because you want 1% of your portfolio to go up, how’s that fair? Or the “arbitraging” argument, etc. You are destroying mine and other people’s futures. I cannot believe this is a real argument and that some of you would be against it. Just do what you need—screenshot dates so no arbitrage can happen, tax us a late conversion fee. But don’t leave us with nothing.

[Muntjess]

Concerns About the Token Migration Proposal

I must express strong concern regarding both this proposal and the arbitrary deadline for the token migration. This approach undermines the principles of decentralization and responsible governance.

You are handling funds that belong to the community, it is not acceptable to unilaterally revoke access to tokens via a governance vote. If such an action is deemed legitimate, then what is to prevent the community from proposing to seize all tokens held by the Maple Foundation and redistribute them elsewhere? That is effectively what this proposal is doing with 10% of the total supply.

This sets a dangerous precedent and directly contradicts the ethos of Web3, which is built on fairness, transparency, and user sovereignty. Moves like this do not foster trust, they erode it, and risk driving people away from the space altogether.

I urge the team and the community to reconsider this path, and to engage in a more open, equitable, and decentralized decision-making process.

A Better Alternative

To address the concerns around token migration while ensuring that those who contributed to the project are respected, I propose the creation of a never-ending token swap pool, where MPL tokens can always be swapped for SYRUP. This would allow holders to transition their assets at their own pace without the pressure of an arbitrary deadline.

Alternatively, a snapshot can be taken of all addresses that still hold MPL tokens at a certain time, and those addresses would then receive an airdrop of SYRUP tokens. This approach would bring the value back to the people who actually paid for it, instead of benefitting random initiatives that may not reflect the contributions of loyal token holders.

This method ensures that value remains with the people who supported the project from the start, creating a more equitable and transparent process, while also honoring the principles of decentralization.

[Ieva2025]

I respect Kraftcap’s concern, and yes, institutional adoption requires diligence and credibility. But credibility doesn’t mean undoing a transparent, DAO-approved decision just because a minority missed the window. That’s not how you build trust with serious investors, it’s how you lose it.

The conversion was open for six months, and announced across every official Maple channel, not just Coinbase. Telegram, Twitter, GitBook, the Maple site, and multiple emails—notices went out well before the final 45 days. If someone only saw the Coinbase email 45 days out, that doesn’t mean the migration wasn’t properly communicated. It means they weren’t following the project closely.

Yes, personal circumstances like health issues are unfortunate, and no one is unsympathetic to that. But governance isn’t built on exceptions. If we open the door to reversing core decisions every time someone claims special circumstances, we erode the entire DAO framework. Traditional finance has systems in place, but it also has cutoffs, deadlines, and hard lines. Miss a corporate action deadline in TradFi, and you miss it, no one reverses dilution or rewinds the cap table for you.

Calling this “reverse dilution” is also misleading. This was not a dilution event. It was a migration, and everyone had equal opportunity to participate. Those who didn’t act didn’t get diluted—they opted out by missing a widely communicated deadline. And frankly, I can already see Syrup holders getting frustrated. If this proposal passes, many of them will start selling, which could crash the price again—just like last time. We all know the Maple team made a critical mistake pushing this conversion in the middle of a bull market when the MPL token was appreciating, and the price paid for it. If you go down the same road now and alienate your most engaged Syrup holders, it could tank the project again, and this market won’t wait around forever.

Institutional investors don’t want unpredictability. They want clear governance, rule adherence, and a strong community that respects votes. Reversing this now would send the opposite message. If the goal is to grow Syrup’s credibility, the right move is to honor the process, not unravel it.

@Sid and Maple team,

I say this with full respect for the work you’ve put into the protocol: Syrup holders are already showing signs of frustration. If this proposal goes through, many of them may start exiting their positions, which risks triggering another price drop, just like we saw during the Maple-Syrup migration.

Frankly, pushing the conversion in the middle of a bull market was a misstep, and the token’s performance suffered for it. Repeating that mistake now by alienating your most engaged and active holders could be even more damaging, especially at a time when momentum is finally building again. This market won’t last forever, and trust is fragile.

You have a real shot at strengthening Syrup’s long-term position, but that depends on honoring governance outcomes, respecting those who showed up early, and avoiding decisions that fracture the community. Please take that seriously. I agree with Syrupfan that the unconverted tokens should be used for marketing purposes instead. Please consider a new separate proposal in that regard.

[Dezerta]

Dear Maple Community Members,

I would like to share my experience as a long-standing investor in the Maple protocol. Unfortunately, like other MPL holders, I missed the conversion period to the SYRUP token by a few days, mainly due to a period of inactivity on the networks.

1. Offline Investors

Although the conversion period lasted several months, it’s important to recognize that not all MPL holders received the information. Some users, particularly those who store their tokens on hardware wallets or adopt a long-term investment strategy, may not follow protocol news regularly without being irresponsible. In a decentralized ecosystem, information dissemination can present challenges, and it’s understandable that some investors take a step back for personal or strategic reasons. There are already enough financial risks in web3; being offline for a few months should not be a reason for sanction.

This is not a debate about eligibility criteria for an airdrop or a free token distribution. We’re talking about MPL holders who have financially invested and supported the Maple protocol since its inception.

2. Impact on Investor Confidence

MPL holders were among the first to support the protocol, contributing to its growth and stability. Denying them the opportunity to convert their tokens to SYRUP can be perceived as a punitive measure, likely to erode confidence in the protocol. It’s essential to maintain this trust to ensure the sustainability and development of the Maple ecosystem. There are already enough scams and frauds of all kinds; missing a conversion window should not be a reason to lose one’s entire investment. Such measures can drastically discourage people from investing in web3. We must all be in the same boat; together, we will grow the project.

3. An Opportunity to Strengthen the Community

An exceptional reopening of the conversion would offer investors a chance to fully join the SYRUP ecosystem, thereby strengthening community cohesion. This measure would demonstrate Maple’s commitment to its historical users and its concern for fairness.

4. Concrete Proposal

I propose setting up one or more conversion windows over time, allowing all offline investors to convert their tokens. However, to account for the efforts of members who completed the conversion on time, a progressive penalty could be applied to late conversions. The funds collected could feed the protocol’s treasury and support community initiatives.

Thank you for your attention.

Sincerely

[remon]

Wise decisions made by a responsible team will make the community even more united.

[mateo.syrup]

Thank you so much for opening an additional 48 hours for us MPL token investors. This certainly shows the team’s commitment to its community.

[ZooTv]

What you’re proposing adds unnecessary complexity.

A snapshot isn’t the clean solution it seems. On-chain holdings can be split or manipulated, and centralized exchange balances are difficult to verify. Some addresses will inevitably be left out, and we’ll be back at square one trying to accommodate them.

And to be clear: arbitrage isn’t exploitation—it’s a normal market function that helps align prices across platforms. Trying to block it with filters only adds risk, cost, and confusion.

If fairness and decentralization are the goal, the simplest path is best: reopen the window briefly, treat everyone equally, and move forward without overengineering. Or choose not to reopen it and stand by the decision as it should have been from the start.