So, in other words, what you are saying is that Maple is only for those that spend 7 days a week engaged? And that you don’t need any investors that just want to put their money there and wait? So this is for traders only, long term investors are not welcome. If this is the case let us know and I won’t put a penny more on this project.
3 Likes
In other words, long-term investors are more than welcome in all crypto or non-crypto projects. As long as they take their responsibilities as investors, accept losses or rejoice in gains, and above all, do not come complaining when they make mistakes and lose due to lack of attention or consistency in monitoring their investments. This is the foundation of investing in all fields. Investing is a job in itself for everyone, trader or non-trader. This is not dehumanization but rather maintaining a professional awareness with one’s own capital. We all invest knowing the possible risks and must accept the potential consequences.
Aside from that, I wish you the best and success.
There is no serious financial instrument in the world (at least that I’m familiar with) where buying and holding and asset for long-term could result in it the asset or investment being completely voided because the issuing entity has decided, way after your purchase, to amend the rules such that holders need to push a button within a certain time frame.
Sure, maybe you can name me some meme coins, but nothing even remotely serious. Especially not something trying to challenge TradFi with better and more open tech.
11 Likes
All investors are welcome. There’s a small group tossing around labels like “diamond hands” and using them to suggest they’re somehow more entitled or superior because they bought in early or are constantly active. I’m not one of those people, and I don’t believe that kind of thinking helps the community.
Let’s aim for 100% migration, that would show unity.
9 Likes
Imo, other factors in favor of the additional conversion window:
- SYRUP token launch proposal ended on September 9th 2024, giving less than a year time for migration, that does not seem plenty of time
- This is an unprecedented situation in which there was a deadline set for conversion
- This is an unprecedented situation in which if you do not convert, you lose your assets with no predefined method for recovery
- This is the crypto space, in which we are well aware there is no formal way to contact your users, even further, we do not know who some of the users are, for this reason it is important to be extremely considerate and careful
- Imo the process was rushed, the proposals for the deadline and for exclusivity of SYRUP for governance were approved the same day, December 30th 2024. If the reason for setting a conversion deadline is fragmented liquidity, you have to approach the matter progressively, first you begin with the implementation of SYRUP as the only governance token and give it time to see if it helps with the issue. Only after a decent amount of time and if the issue persists should you consider further measures
10 Likes
I believe the team has a responsibility to disclose the detailed voting data of the recent migration proposal. I was unable to find this information on the forum. However, on-chain data shows that there are over 9,000 MPL holding addresses, while the forum has fewer than 200 registered users. The number of people who actually participated in the discussion and vote is likely even lower.
This raises a serious concern: Did this proposal reach a reasonable level of participation? For example, was more than 50% of the token supply or a representative portion of active users involved? This is critical to assessing the legitimacy and representativeness of the governance process.
We cannot allow the perception that such an important decision—one that affects the real interests of thousands of holders and may even cause financial loss to some—was pushed through by a small group of insiders.
A truly healthy DeFi governance system must be built on the principles of transparency, openness, and broad participation, not one that leaves the wider community questioning the process or feeling excluded.
8 Likes
For those who pushed the responsibility to passive MPL holders,
imagine a case you are holding Facebook stocks, FB for 10 years, then in 2022, it changed its ticker to META, and for those who forget to manually convert their holding or “irresponsible” should have all their FB holding goes to ZERO.
is that fair?
11 Likes
Fellow MPL holder that just wants to add his two cents. I bought MPL when looking for undervalued gems in the peak of the bear market. I am a long term holder and felt my investment would be safe as houses on a hard wallet. Life comes at you sometimes. In my case I was diagnosed with a stage 3A synovial sarcoma in October 2024. I couldn’t have cared at all about MPL community posts and missed all communication about this conversion. I only noticed when the price of MPL plummeted. There never should have been a deadline to convert and it only hurt some of your strongest supporters. I agree with all the positive posts above.
This isn’t a sob story. I’m not asking for a handout. I’m asking for what is rightfully mine.
12 Likes
Full support for Reopening the MPL → SYRUP Conversion Window
this is a matter of DAO Principles, Fairness, and Community Trust
Maple is a DAO; that means governance decisions must reflect the will and best interest of the community. The proposed final closure of the MPL to SYRUP conversion window, without any remaining path for holders who missed it, contradicts the very foundations of what a DAO stands for: inclusion, fairness, transparency, and accountability.
DeFi was built to be inclusive, not exclusionary. Denying users the ability to convert their tokens, despite their long-standing involvement in the protocol, sends the wrong signal. Several community members have clearly stated they missed the window for legitimate reasons: health issues, personal emergencies, or simply being inactive during a period of major transition. These individuals should not be permanently punished for that.
There are solutions to this issue. A controlled, time-limited reopening of the conversion window would be a fair and transparent way to close this chapter without alienating the community. Ignoring these concerns is not only damaging from a reputational standpoint, it may also expose the protocol to legal risk. Disenfranchising tokenholders without offering any recourse, particularly in a regulated environment, is a dangerous path to take.
I strongly support the proposal and the message shared by the former Maple developer, who raised clear and legitimate concerns around governance, ethics, and community alignment.
14 Likes
I am supportive of this proposal. I have been a holder since 2022 and was notified by Coinbase 45 days prior. My account was locked in KYC during that period and was unable to do the conversation. I think it is reasonable to open up the conversion window and help long term holders of the token.
14 Likes
The issue is for those who held MPL on exchanges like Coinbase (myself included). I withdrew after the migration, but it was too late. I know others in the same boat. Liquidity is low on DEXs, and post-conversion sell-offs have tanked the price, likely offsetting any buybacks. It might not make a big impact overall, but it could seriously affect individuals. Some also sold after the window and may want to buy back using different exchanges. I think the proposal should be kept simply, to allow holders to convert their MPL.
6 Likes
Do you know where I invested for free money? Coins that invest in Maple’s future but neglect long-term investors like this are just memecoins or job coins. If you don’t want to get involved in a lawsuit after being treated as a garbage coin that eliminates the principal of your investment by converting syrup, please switch to an indefinite conversion.
1 Like
Exact same story for me
1 Like
Hi Candy, I am in the exactly same position as you. I have multiple CEXs accounts and wallets. Luckily I did convert most, but forgot about an account.
I agree keep it simple, just open it up again let people convert. If you start making it more complicated, people will be left out again.
To those who are against this, just think about a time you needed help?
7 Likes
how do i vote on this May14 proposal? i am also in the 11% that missed out on the conversion.
When the assets in your wallet can be arbitrarily altered or converted by the project team without any accountability, it’s not innovation—it’s regression. There’s no decentralization or user sovereignty if your funds become worthless just because you didn’t follow their exact process (with an arbitrary deadline, no less).
We must fix this model. In the long run, it will hurt both current holders and the project team’s reputation.
7 Likes
When is voting happening on this? Or did it get approved already?
Is there a way to see the current state of voting? %yes %no? Anyone knows?
There are so many great points in this forum. Just remember we are all human here; we should all be proud that we built this great community, and we should all help each other. If you have any doubts, just take time to read this forum. It’s so alive; let’s not destroy what we’ve created.
1 Like
Voting ‘yes’ to this proposal without including a wallet & balance snapshot filter, can potentially allocate more MPL tokens to arbitrageurs than to long time holders.
Looking at data from previous posts, arbitrageur allocation could be up to 320K MPL (with an estimated profit of 14x and $9.6M). These amounts incentivize the use of all tactics to get a vote passed, and will incentivize another push for a new conversion window in the mid term (as MPL goes to zero after the new conversion window and SYRUP price keeps going up).
These figures assume 100% conversion from both groups, although this is more likely for arbitrageurs, while there will likely be a significant group of holders that are still unaware of the new conversion window.
Think that the best alternative is to include the mentioned wallet & balance snapshot filter in the proposal before voting (or alternatively vote ‘no’ to this proposal and have a new one set up that includes the filter). Would also consider a potentially longer conversion window, as arbitrage would be prevented by the snapshot.
Assume that long time MPL holders will agree with the conversion filter, that will get them in - but will leave out arbitrageurs that may drain a significant amount of protocol value (and will be back for more).
2 Likes