If the voting passes, what will happen for Coinbase Holder like me? I have Mpl on coinbase since 1 year, and I have missed the migration process.
2 Likes
Iâm in full support of this proposal. A six-month window simply wasnât enoughâthereâs no realistic way to ensure every MPL holder saw or understood the migration in that time.
This is decentralized financeâopen and accessible to all. Imposing a hard deadline went against that spirit. Reopening the migration isnât just reasonable; itâs necessary to give more people the chance to continue participating in the Maple ecosystem.
Supporting this doesnât take anything away from those who already converted. It doesnât hurt the protocol. What it does is offer a second chance to those who want to join the syrup community.
Mistakes happen, and this proposal is about owning that and making it right. Thatâs leadership. Thatâs what builds trust.
If we shut the door now, we risk permanently losing dedicated Maple supporters. And letâs be honest, there wonât be another chance after this. Letâs do the right thing while we still can.
5 Likes
Iâm for this proposal. Anyone knows how to see the current state of todayâs vote?
3 Likes
Not trying to be confrontational, but I donât understand why weâre getting hung up on arbitrage. It doesnât impact SYRUP holders at all. The same amount of MPL Is eligible to be converted regardless. And the SYRUP total circulating supply can be increased by the same amount. Not to mention that anybody can acquire MPL right now, so itâs not particularly excluding anybody from taking advantage of this. Further, as I mentioned before, the only âlosersâ are those who sold their MPL for cents on the dollar because of the deadline being passed, and the only âwinnersâ are those who bought it with the risk of it being a void token. Yes itâs not ideal, but, respectfully, the arbitrage âissueâ is a red herring.
3 Likes
I think you can see all proposals here, but it doesnât already up yet.
Have to say I agree, whichever the choice, feel that the outcome will be pretty much the same. I have been looking at MPL on coingecko the last days and the daily volume has been less than $US 20k daily, the pools have less than $60k of combined liquidity
In order for this to make sense, itâs important that there are no restrictions on which MPL can be converted. Many holders kept their tokens on CEXs like Coinbase and would not be able to convert under restrictions. Additionally, a significant number of holders sold after April 30th, which contributed to the price drop. With this implemented, many would be buying back in.
Regarding arbitrage, thereâs no real opportunity here, itâs a risk. Liquidity is extremely low, so even small purchases have a noticeable impact on price. Itâs important to note that the token has already plummeted, and any buybacks would simply be offsetting sales.
To conclude, âarbâ from MPL is going to likely be very insignificant but in order for a fair conversion to SYRUP, it is very important to have no restrictions on MPL as it would negatively effect anyone that held on a CEX or moved funds in reaction of the initial window. I hope this message is clear. Maple is making milestones in RWA, and this is needed for the project to be taken seriously.
2 Likes
My take as a very very long crypto holder (since 2013) , I feel this was not done in a proper way, and itâs important to for crypto projects future to improve on this. Migrations should be done via airdrop, period.
When Bitcoin hard forked, to BCash and BSV you got the three types directly âin your walletâ thats to the shared keys. No need to do anything.
With current EVM tech, itâs very easy and very cost effective to airdrop the token to the address already containing the original coin, and just delist the original token. I will never understand the aim of complex migrations.
And if that has to be done, then see the example of NEO (Previously Antshares) Years of migration open, just hinting recently that they might close the period, yes, years of both tokens working simultaneously.
The aim of crypto should be that of democatrising access to investments, not rewarding just the top ones. âBut have not been looking into your investmentâ But I PAID the same as all the other holders to buy the coins.
Some of us have really cold Storage solutions, ones in different countries and with complex access that might require months to access, when I buy some tokens I like to buy, hold and not touch them. Every interaction with a smart contract is dangerous, and can result in a loss, so I try to avoid it.
I encourage fellow holders, to think about the future of the project in regards of not leaving holders behind.
Thanks for reading
4 Likes
TBH if itâs not an AirDrop thereâs no reason to open up the conversion. Because again, if they open it up, people are going to miss it the second time as well, so thereâs going to be people upset later. It will be a never-ending cycle unless they AirDrop.
I mentioned it in an earlier post just airdrop everyone on base chain because itâs cheap transaction fees. Also, when doing this take a snapshot of every holder who was still holding Maple when the deadline expired (not the buyers after speculating).
Obviously, a lot of people had their maple tokens with exchanges. It will be the exchanges responsibility to make those people whole. There would be no legal ramifications on syrupâs behalf. People would have to go after the centralized exchanges for not giving them their tokens if they were airdropped to the exchanges.
We have to think bigger. This is about permissionless financeâfinance without gatekeepers. That means no arbitrary controls over who can buy, sell, invest, or participate.
If Maple wants to be taken seriously in DeFi, we canât pick and choose who gets access based on timing or identity. Thatâs exactly what traditional finance does, and weâre supposed to be building something better.
Reopening migration isnât about bending rulesâitâs about staying true to the core principles of DeFi: openness, fairness, and access for all.
This isnât some exclusive clubâitâs the opposite. DeFi is meant to be open to anyone and everyone. The moment we start deciding whoâs âworthyâ to participate, we lose the very foundation this space was built on.
We canât compromise on that. Openness and accessibility arenât optionalâtheyâre the whole point.
1 Like
Maple Community â Response to Token Conversion & SSF Proposal Feedback
Firstly, thank you to everyone who took the time to share thoughtful, candid, and at times passionate responses to the latest governance proposal. The level of engagement from long-term token holders, DeFi builders, and new community participants alike is a testament to the strength and diversity of the Maple ecosystem. We recognize that governance decisionsâespecially those involving finalityâcan surface deep questions around fairness, process, and protocol values. We want to ensure those questions are met with clarity and respect.
Below is Mapleâs response to the key themes raised during the discussion period:
Governance Integrity vs. Deadline Flexibility
Concerns around governance integrity are valid and important. Mapleâs governance must remain a process that values consistency, transparency, and finality. Thatâs why this proposal introduces a conclusive step in the conversion processâso that the status of legacy MPL tokens can be resolved clearly, in line with previous governance decisions (including MIP-010).
That said, this proposal also acknowledges a reality: some long-term holders, particularly those on custodial platforms or less engaged with daily news, missed the original migration window. Rather than ignore these users, the community is being asked whether a final, one-time grace window should be offered to convert legacy MPL into SYRUPâpaired with a clear governance plan for the remaining unconverted supply. This approach balances protocol integrity with community inclusion.
Communication & Notification Shortcomings
The team made repeated efforts across multiple months and channels to notify MPL holders of the conversion deadline, including:
- Posts and notices on the Maple Governance Forum
- Frequent reminders on X (Twitter) and Telegram
- Direct email campaigns
- Updates in the Maple Gitbook
- Recorded and live community events
- Platform-wide notifications were supported
Most centralized exchanges (CEXs) handled the migration on behalf of users. For those that didnât, we understand and empathize with the frustration, but we cannot control third-party exchange operations or their communication practices.
MPL Conversion Price Arbitrage & Fairness
Some raised concerns that re-opening conversion could create arbitrage opportunities by allowing MPL purchases below the SYRUP conversion ratio. In theory this is fairâbut in practice, the arbitrage concern is overstated. Since the conversion deadline:
- MPL has been delisted from major CEXs
- On-chain liquidity is extremely thin
- Attempting to buy meaningful amounts of MPL pushes price up, negating any arbitrage
- Many legacy MPL holders are already long-term participants, not opportunistic buyers
Ultimately, the goal is to give existing holdersânot new speculatorsâone final chance to engage with the protocol and convert into the active token ecosystem.
Closing Thoughts
Governance is rarely perfectâand itâs never easy when dealing with real financial impact. But it is ours to shapeâtogether. This proposal seeks to address the current realities of the ecosystem while upholding the core principles that have made Maple a trusted and resilient part of DeFi.
The vote will go live today, May 14, 2025. We encourage every community member to read the proposal in full and participate in the vote. Maple is prepared to implement the result of this decision, and we remain committed to building a strong, transparent, and sustainable lending ecosystem with all of you.
With appreciation,
The Maple Team
14 Likes
Really excited to see this, thank you.
How exactly do we vote? If anyone can provide some instructions that would be great
2 Likes
Donât really understand why these two very important proposals are being stuffed together. I donât think they should be conjoined as some community members have stated they would prefer at least some or all of the tokens to be burned after the deadline. Due to this I will be voting no as this is truly two proposals that should be separate.
1 Like
Not really, I hold my MPL on a ledger and had no idea this was happening. Now, imagine if you bought Facebook 15 years ago and you just held, not worried about price, with a retirement timeline in mind. All of a sudden, they change their name to Meta and you loose all your money because you were not aware that you needed to press a few buttons to keep your investment. Do you think this is fair?
3 Likes
Hey everyone - the vote is now live in Snapshot at the link below. We appreciate everyoneâs comments and hope to see you all voting.
Well, well, 3.2m votes against⌠thatâs one sh**ty communityâŚ
I am also one of the many that lost their allocation because of some âtimeframeâ. As someone said before me, having at all an option to loose your money, just because you are a long term supporter and you donât go and check the platform everyday is just complete bullsh*t.
All the coins should of been airdropped like almost every other project in the world.
To all of the AGAINST-voters - canât really understand how can you be happy that someone lost their investment and vote against such a thing.
AND ALSO - to those that are afraid that this will âdeludeâ their investment - in the proposal itâs written that âunconverted MPL tokensâ will be converted to SYRUP ones at some pointâŚthis will happen no matter if we get our coins or not, so it wonât matter if they are going to go in someone that claimed their allocation or just converted.
4 Likes
I didnât react earlier because, in my opinion, this is a poor example youâre taking from Mr. Deluca and one other voice. The comparison is simple and obvious to me. The initial price of Facebook stock has grown by a multiplier of approximately 10 to 50 times and more its base price over 15 years, without any action. The crypto market is different in terms of rules, movements, and thus actions; its price can increase by 10 to 50 times (equal to Facebook) over a period of 1, 2, or 3 years, which justifies pressing two buttons to achieve the same return, but with 13 years less waiting. Because the market is more volatile, more dangerous, and thus more rewarding or the opposite, but in less time. So i think, itâs fair and believe that Iâve answered your question. If this migration must occur, it will require the approval of the governance to ensure its legitimacy and compliance. Thatâs the core principle of a DAO: ensuring every voice is heard, without hate or reproach or twitter spam scamming bots, and with respect for each personâs opinion.
I see ZERO logic in your statement, really⌠because the price can increase faster, we have to push buttons?! What the hell are you talking about?
2 Likes
These are the early hours of the gouvernance vote for the migration. Nothing is acted at the moment. 