Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address | proposals.app

posted 3 years ago

As a holder of Arb from being a recipient of this airdrop... Also, I am a holder who recently had lost access to the wallet containing the airdrop, stressed about it being set to expire in 5 months, but was hella lucky to find the seed.. so, excitement and all, I can see how maybe I would have lost my tokens too??? Thankfully, I claimed the tokens, while choosing to self delegate (because I can't guarantee that someone who says they will do something positive with my voting power, won't change their plans later..right?), Yet... I experienced 0 loss, why? all my tokens are on my wallet... why? Where did people go wrong to send their tokens to the contract address? Was this a bug from delegating power being assigned to someone else... A malicious character masked to send delegated tokens to the contract address? To the actual contract?? i mean, I can only assume that people would be so hurried here, to get their tokens asap, happy to collect the $$, that they acted too hastily?? Don't get me wrong, I feel for anyone who now sits dumbfounded at how they were able to send their tokens off into the abyss, yet if it was a personal mistake based on trying to collect to just sell off, i dont support giving anythifng back... because I was one who had been previously hacked through a clever, yet sneaky af, metamask ad phishing attack that saw me losing $30,000 usd in VA backpay, and never recovered it no matter how sorry I was, no matter how innocent i was...... Noone helped me once I (emphasis on I) made the mistake of clicking on an ad, instead of the site itself.

On the other hand.... Was this a coding mistake? A arbitrum mistake in delegation??? If so, my vote is definitely swayed... Help me choose my decision because the facts must be presented by the team with their collective findings being reported... Not gonna be an irrational voter. Why I chose to self delegate and not just give my voting power to someone else...Everyone already knows that you're supposed DYOR too... I don't think that people who get an airdrop, aka power to vote on the future of the dao and ecosystem, should be able to give their power away (without losing a portion of their tokens). Like.. Less responsibility, less reward, make sense? It does to me and would have been a nice feature but I guess people could just sell anyway and the votes wouldn't matter anyway, right? Regardless...

So I'm going to ask for clarification from the arbitrum team... Did people simply mess up and send to the wrong address after adding the contract address to find their tokens? (after claiming) or was the process of selecting a delegate, however fast and hurriedly presented, somehow flawed? I ask because people who had been too excited to collect their $, without having a shred of knowledge or dedication to arbitrum, based on their willingness to dispose of their voting power (trusting others to keep their word, when many dont) screwed themselves from dumping the token? And now want to get another chance ?? Giving their voting power to someone else due to their disinterest in having a personal impact on this ecosystem? I'm torn between two outcomes but I'm sure I don't want to vote to forgive people for messing up when they should have known better..if that was the case.... meaning...if it was a mistake from user??. Sorry and thanks for the funds that can be used to fund future projects or distributed back to active voters?... Now on the other hand, if it was somehow arbs mistake?? let's put a quick end to the debate and vote to give them their deserved money back?? .. Time will tell what happened and the team should be able to figure this out. Until then my vote is neither yes or no... If no info is released I will follow the consensus on the ballot....my 2 cents..

Realdealwill

posted 3 years ago

Busterdustercatrs

posted 3 years ago

I am a long term holder of top 10 cryptos and although may not hold a lot it is what I have been able to save . That being said, I know crypto pretty well and have my exchange coins on Coinbase and I have my long term holds on Coinbase wallet and trust wallet. I am very new to air drops and the only reason I wanted to join this community is because I first saw ARB when it was listed on Coinbase ( exchange) I looked through the website and road map and was very impressed. I bought a decent amount on the exchange. Then I was looking into how to stake or get involved within the many options that arb offered. I received a notification of an air drop release I could join in. The page was ARB foundation and all I did was connect my Coinbase wallet and then all my eth was sent to what I thought was the air drop event. I didn’t even buy anything yet. All I did was connect my wallet and it was taken. I have voiced my case here and I have been met with nothing but rude ass comments and people that do nothing but talk shit rather then be helpful or at least talk to us like people. I’m not a bot, nor am I a scammer. I’m just a hard working American that is trying to invest into this project. I am new to this air drop thing and I have done countless hours of research but at the same time I feel like I am very new to the air drop and nft’s . I can research all day but I am far from college educated majoring in developer’s or blockchain expert programming and all that good stuff. It literally took me over a year to save that damn etherium just to lose it all and then be talked to like I’m a piece of shit because I wanted to join into this community. The way you treat people is F’d up and if you guys treat the people that one day when a mass adoption happens join I truly feel sorry for people like me who you consider a novice and wreckless that fall for this crap. There are many like me that have been scammed solely by someone or some entity that is in conjunction with this project. It’s bad enough to lose what I have worked so hard for but then to be talked down to like I’m a piece of shit on top of it doesn’t want me to make me learn more, it has made me not want to ever invest anything ever again with this project or anything like it. I am the majority of the people new to this sector that you are trying to reach and that sucks! Also I do not have telegram and I rarely use Twitter. I really was interested just from reading through the project website and road map. You need to get better people representing then what you have here on this forum wether they are part of the employed or not. 1 eth may not be a lot to you all but that was over a year of saving. Instead of telling us how dumb we are and the stupidity it takes to be scammed or make novice mistakes, why don’t you use you words of knowledge to help people or direct people to where we need to go to learn ( get off your high horse of thinking you are the all knowing Crypto Gods) this is a forum right? Help or teach useful information. What the hell do I know? I’m just a wreckless novice idiotic Piece of shit right. Oh I forgot to add bot and scammer in there too!

Thanks for nothing. Hope people steer very clear of this project

104

Busterdustercatrs

posted 3 years ago

Thanks for nothing. Hope people steer very clear of this project

104

amaroney55

posted 3 years ago

Hey sorry I have been busy around the house haven't had a chance to catch up on everything. I guess tomorrow they are gonna discuss it???? I seen one guy saying they are basically gonna be discussing a lot of stuff from the first meeting again didn't sound like he was to thrilled and other guy that organized it didn't mention it. But if they do the right thing that will be cool if not so be it but they shouldn't say we shouldn't have sent it back to them when I know I didn't even see it hit my account. And is it possible for transaction s to go missing in the block chain on aribiscan cause I noticed I am missing a couple of transactions? I don't maybe web3 going crazy?? I say (which I really don't have any I don't have much arb anymore) but I think after this is settled I think we need to make a proposal on a way somehow of blacklisting scammer any fake airdrop tokens any of that crap that stuff is getting so old. Man you can any really talk to ppl in any crypto site scared to invest in any meme coins. It's freaking ridiculous. You know how much effort they put into their scams. I ain't hating really I understand if u have do what you do. But come on this has gotten outta hand. I got hit with that new gas tokens hack I didn't have much anyway. Maybe someone can make a come back clause in a buyers contract make it where someone send u bs tokens or scams you you have like 2 days to claim BS and within those 2 days any money that got took or scanned couldn't be traded or anything until that time period ended. And in those 2 days if someone called BS on a person they would have 48hours to explain why and what they did to scam steal whatever to that person to a delegated party of 2 or 3. and if they don't respond make the money owed and plus double come back to the person pay the money from what was owed and the extra give person like a 1/4 extra like interest and some to the delegated judges and so back to the foundation. And if guilty make the pay whatever like fine or be blacklisted like and try to get with other networks and make that blacklist go around to all networks. Just an idea. Cause I am tired of talking to ppl who are fake and stupid part is how they they act like we can't tell. When the first thing is not a scam I will send u 5000000usdt but u gotta pay gas naw fool u sending me that much u can take it outta that money your sending me. Sorry bad night I am ill and ranting.

amaroney55

posted 3 years ago

yonathan

posted 3 years ago

I've mostly answered to people that have made baseless accusations regarding the claim contracts, and also tried to educate people on what could have happened to them and what is and what is not possible.

The point of having a governance forum is to hear different opinions on proposals, not to have an echo chamber. Since OP, 90% of replies haven't been productive at all and it's mostly been one-liners or spam-like messages.

101

I've made a suggestion myself on how this issue could be resolved (bellow) and would support a proposal that's rightly and realistically argued.

I'll always try to help and educate people if I feel I can help and if I feel like sharing my opinion on anything, I'll do just that, but thank you for your suggestion.

Quoted from yonathan

This is the solution I’m thinking about:

Wait until AD claim is over (I believe that will be sometime in September)*
Put op a DAO vote so that token holders at that point decide if they want the team to implement the following idea or leave the tokens as they are

If DAO agrees:

Take a snapshot of all the wallets that made a tx to both the distributor and the token contracts
Unify all the ARB tokens in DAO multisig
Deploy a fork of the distributor contract, with the snapshotted addresses and amounts (10% deducted**)
Transfer 90% of recoverable tokens to new distributor contract
Open a new claim for said addresses for a pre-determined amount of time (3 months maybe?)
Unclaimed tokens will be transferred back to DAO multisig

*I believe this would avoid having people making the same mistake even after the solution is implemented.

**The DAO would keep 10% of all recovered tokens to compensate for manpower, gas fees, etc. which will be kept in DAO multisig.

jump to post →

101

stonecoldpat

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

Hi all,

First and foremost, it is unfortunate that people have lost access to their funds by sending it back to ARB’s ERC20 contract. It is clearly not a desirable outcome for the airdrop.

129

Hi all,

First and foremost, it is unfortunate that people have lost access to their funds by sending it back to ARB’s ERC20 contract. It is clearly not a desirable outcome for the airdrop.

To provide context around the Foundation, our role is to act as Stewards/Shepherds for the DAO and help to enact its will. While we are able to provide advice on the legal, technical, and precedence ramifications of a given decision, it is ultimately up to the will of the DAO to determine the course of action. Additionally, all decisions must adhere to the Arbitrum Constitution.

We can take this opportunity to understand the situation a bit better. We can utilize on-chain data to quantify the lost funds and the affected addresses/transactions. At present, there are approximately 175k ARB tokens affected, impacting less than 200 addresses/transactions. On average, we can estimate that each transaction involves ~888 ARB. It is worth noting that funds are still being sent to the ERC20 contract.

The ideal technical solution is to select a cutoff point beyond which funds will not be refunded. ARB tokens from the DAO’s treasury can be used to refund the affected users as opposed to upgrading the ERC20 contract. We can assume all user addresses are not compromised (user fault & not a hack). We should not permit sending funds to new addresses.

However, the most important thing to consider for the DAO when making this decision is the reason why the funds were lost and the on-going precedent that is set by rectifying it. The funds were lost due to user error and there is no issue with the Arbitrum software/smart contracts. If the DAO is willing to fix this issue, it may open the DAO up to fixing further issues that were caused by user error. I know this is a small case now, but we don’t know what will emerge in the future. So we should be cautious and keep this in mind when making that decision.

We hope that this perspective from the Foundation proves useful and reiterate our commitment to assisting the DAO in whatever decision is ultimately made.

yonathan

posted 3 years ago

101

I've made a suggestion myself on how this issue could be resolved (bellow) and would support a proposal that's rightly and realistically argued.

I'll always try to help and educate people if I feel I can help and if I feel like sharing my opinion on anything, I'll do just that, but thank you for your suggestion.

Quoted from yonathan

This is the solution I’m thinking about:

Wait until AD claim is over (I believe that will be sometime in September)*
Put op a DAO vote so that token holders at that point decide if they want the team to implement the following idea or leave the tokens as they are

If DAO agrees:

Take a snapshot of all the wallets that made a tx to both the distributor and the token contracts
Unify all the ARB tokens in DAO multisig
Deploy a fork of the distributor contract, with the snapshotted addresses and amounts (10% deducted**)
Transfer 90% of recoverable tokens to new distributor contract
Open a new claim for said addresses for a pre-determined amount of time (3 months maybe?)
Unclaimed tokens will be transferred back to DAO multisig

*I believe this would avoid having people making the same mistake even after the solution is implemented.

**The DAO would keep 10% of all recovered tokens to compensate for manpower, gas fees, etc. which will be kept in DAO multisig.

jump to post →

101

stonecoldpat

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

Hi all,

First and foremost, it is unfortunate that people have lost access to their funds by sending it back to ARB’s ERC20 contract. It is clearly not a desirable outcome for the airdrop.

129

Hi all,

First and foremost, it is unfortunate that people have lost access to their funds by sending it back to ARB’s ERC20 contract. It is clearly not a desirable outcome for the airdrop.

We hope that this perspective from the Foundation proves useful and reiterate our commitment to assisting the DAO in whatever decision is ultimately made.

DisruptionJoe from disruptionjoe.eth

64.1K TOKEN

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

I think this is correct. Additionally, the DAO doesn't hold responsibility for those who received and then sent their airdrops to the contract address (or any other address). This entire thread reeks of illegitimacy. Any account or address I've followed has been quite questionable, though I haven't done a thorough investigation so that is anecdotal.

My experience with this is two years as the workstream lead for Gitcoin's Fraud Detection & Defense workstream.

117

My experience with this is two years as the workstream lead for Gitcoin's Fraud Detection & Defense workstream.

There are simply too many red flags for me to believe this is worth the time of the DAO.

I would be voting no to this proposal as it stands.

I don't believe the DAO should set a precedent of taking responsibility for mistakes of users.
If there was a known incident of a hack in the Arbitrum official discord, we could do a proposal specific to addresses affected, but only AFTER applying fraud detection to the addresses involved as the owner of the hack could be the owner of most affected! This is a zero cost attack and I know from experience the sybils are crafty.
The process would need to be clearly scoped with milestones including a formal process for collecting addresses affected where they must include certain other identifiers, then the fraud detection, then the ratification of a final list.
The process would need a champion willing to do the work. I would be more than willing to vote to reimburse someone for their time IF it turned out there was a legitimate claim. Unfortunately, I wouldn't vote to fund this in advance at this point.

Side Note on Sybils

I'm very interested in minimizing the impact of sybil voters. There are transparent and auditable tools to do this along with better mechanism design we could use for our grant program governance (which is what sybils would want access too)

Sybil Detection Solutions

We can work with the Open Data Community to crowdsource detection using open-source code and data extracted from the source. There is also the option of using a service provider like TrustaLabs. While their approach is more blackbox, their expertise would show in the final reporting.

Mechanism Design Solutions

I've already suggested one such design before.

Quoted from DisruptionJoe

I’d love to see this. I’m a big fan of Quadratic Weighted Staking.

To utilize governance tokens, $ARB holders would have to stake their $ARB to “charge up” (yes, like turbo in NBA Jam!). Let’s say that staking for 3 months gives your 80% of your governance weight. 1 year would give you 90%. A logarithmic curve.

Flexible Voting would allow people to LP and earn yeild while staking for governance.

It is called “Quadratic” because the voting power is the square root of $ARB tokens held times the “charge up” coefficient. This makes the preferences of many more important than the few.

Additionally, by forcing staking commitments to vote, it creates a natural sybil resistance because bad actors are forced to play into positive sum game theory.

I’d love to propose this to governance sooner than later.

jump to post →

Another option would be to partner with an org like the Token Engineering Academy to find other potential system designs.

DisruptionJoe from disruptionjoe.eth

64.1K TOKEN

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

My experience with this is two years as the workstream lead for Gitcoin's Fraud Detection & Defense workstream.

117

My experience with this is two years as the workstream lead for Gitcoin's Fraud Detection & Defense workstream.

There are simply too many red flags for me to believe this is worth the time of the DAO.

I would be voting no to this proposal as it stands.

I don't believe the DAO should set a precedent of taking responsibility for mistakes of users.
If there was a known incident of a hack in the Arbitrum official discord, we could do a proposal specific to addresses affected, but only AFTER applying fraud detection to the addresses involved as the owner of the hack could be the owner of most affected! This is a zero cost attack and I know from experience the sybils are crafty.
The process would need to be clearly scoped with milestones including a formal process for collecting addresses affected where they must include certain other identifiers, then the fraud detection, then the ratification of a final list.
The process would need a champion willing to do the work. I would be more than willing to vote to reimburse someone for their time IF it turned out there was a legitimate claim. Unfortunately, I wouldn't vote to fund this in advance at this point.

Side Note on Sybils

Sybil Detection Solutions

Mechanism Design Solutions

I've already suggested one such design before.

Quoted from DisruptionJoe

I’d love to see this. I’m a big fan of Quadratic Weighted Staking.

Flexible Voting would allow people to LP and earn yeild while staking for governance.

It is called “Quadratic” because the voting power is the square root of $ARB tokens held times the “charge up” coefficient. This makes the preferences of many more important than the few.

Additionally, by forcing staking commitments to vote, it creates a natural sybil resistance because bad actors are forced to play into positive sum game theory.

I’d love to propose this to governance sooner than later.

jump to post →

Another option would be to partner with an org like the Token Engineering Academy to find other potential system designs.

Did you receive your airdrop? Did you send your tokens to the ARB contract? If not, then what are you doing in this thread?

Quoted from Busterdustercatrs

There are many like me that have been scammed solely by someone or some entity that is in conjunction with this project.

jump to post →

Nobody in this project scammed you. There are tons of info resources and courses of safe conduct in crypto on the web (I believe, on Coinbase too). All most popular wallets now have at least some checks and warnings when signing, which people somehow choose to ignore. Millions of times people are warned to be careful and not follow phishing links. Of course, there is no 100% safety in crypto (like any financial operations though, but in crypto risks are higher), hacks do happen. But hacks and negligence are completely different cases. For example, I absolutely support any kind of protocol hack (not phishing) reimbursements, because it is not a user's fault.

If you had specific question about the project or safety, you could ask it in this forum too. I'm sure you would've got all the answers really quick. But requiring any reimbursement from people who don't owe you anything... audacious.

Quoted from Busterdustercatrs

You need to get better people representing then what you have here on this forum wether they are part of the employed or not.

jump to post →

If it was directed at me, I'm not representing anyone but myself here and express my opinions only. If you don't want people to express opinions, you would probably like North Korea.

Quoted from Busterdustercatrs

Thanks for nothing. Hope people steer very clear of this project

jump to post →

You too have a good day. I sure hope that we see less of this nonsense here, and more useful discussions serving the development of the project and community. Not just money begging.

101

xenos from millisoft.eth

1.5K TOKEN

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

Why are there so many bots in this thread?

Perhaps I have an answer. I've just looked through the first 16 addresses that sent their ARB tokens to the contract address. Among those 16, only 4 looked like normal users. Remaining 12 were obvious sybil accounts with low balance and irregular activity (almost exclusively from the airdrop guides). Btw now some of those accounts (that were not abandoned) switched to L0 lol🤣

Why are there so many bots in this thread?

The first 2 of those accounts made their transfer attempts 3-4 days before the airdrop. This could possibly point to the claiming script set-up or tuning... It might also be that many of those who sent fell the victim to this flawed claim script. But this one is pure speculation. That said I know about many groups in Telegram that sell claiming scripts or offer automation services.

There were also transfers from Bybit and KuCoin, which really surprised me, and cannot be explained by any claim website bug (as some try to present here).

This can give us, among other things, an idea of how many sybil accounts made it trough the filter. My previous estimate was ~50-60% of all addresses. Now I think I was wrong...

So the question is: Do we really want to

Support negligence and make a dangerous precedent when any user mistake (not hacks or protocol bugs) will be covered. In my opinion, this goes against the ideas of decentralization and principles of safety in crypto.
Give back to sybil accounts that were going to dump the tokens ASAP (or maybe it was even an automation software bug, who knows).
Support those real users who rushed to transfer their tokens in order to sell (I believe the most of them were going to do exactly that). ❓

Did you receive your airdrop? Did you send your tokens to the ARB contract? If not, then what are you doing in this thread?

Quoted from Busterdustercatrs

There are many like me that have been scammed solely by someone or some entity that is in conjunction with this project.

jump to post →

Quoted from Busterdustercatrs

You need to get better people representing then what you have here on this forum wether they are part of the employed or not.

jump to post →

If it was directed at me, I'm not representing anyone but myself here and express my opinions only. If you don't want people to express opinions, you would probably like North Korea.

Quoted from Busterdustercatrs

Thanks for nothing. Hope people steer very clear of this project

jump to post →

You too have a good day. I sure hope that we see less of this nonsense here, and more useful discussions serving the development of the project and community. Not just money begging.

101

xenos from millisoft.eth

1.5K TOKEN

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

Why are there so many bots in this thread?

There were also transfers from Bybit and KuCoin, which really surprised me, and cannot be explained by any claim website bug (as some try to present here).

This can give us, among other things, an idea of how many sybil accounts made it trough the filter. My previous estimate was ~50-60% of all addresses. Now I think I was wrong...

So the question is: Do we really want to

Support negligence and make a dangerous precedent when any user mistake (not hacks or protocol bugs) will be covered. In my opinion, this goes against the ideas of decentralization and principles of safety in crypto.
Give back to sybil accounts that were going to dump the tokens ASAP (or maybe it was even an automation software bug, who knows).
Support those real users who rushed to transfer their tokens in order to sell (I believe the most of them were going to do exactly that). ❓

CryptoNick

625.00 TOKEN

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

While I understand how one may accidentally paste the $ARB contract address into a send address when transferring funds, I am generally against the idea of retrieving funds sent to the wrong address. It sets a dangerous precedent.

However, given the unique circumstances of this situation, I believe it may be acceptable to make an exception in this case. It is important to establish clear guidelines and thresholds for when this kind of recovery should be attempted. For instance, a minimum threshold of 300 ARB should be set to avoid somebody spamming the contract address with low-value transactions that could drive up gas fees.

147

Another important consideration is who should bear the cost of gas fees associated with the recovery process. While it may seem fair for the DAO to cover these costs, It is not fair to expect other users or the DAO to cover the cost of recovering funds that were sent in error due to user negligence or rushing without double-checking. So perhaps a solution would be a fee of x ARB tokens being taken from the amount.

Arbitrum development team should provide an estimated time and cost for recovering tokens accidentally sent to the $ARB contract address and bring it to a vote. However, I also strongly believe that it is ultimately the responsibility of the user to keep their wallet safe and ensure that they are sending transactions to the correct address.

Always remember: While it is understandable that mistakes can happen, it is important to emphasize the importance of taking the time to carefully review and confirm all transaction details before sending funds. Users should take all necessary precautions, such as verifying the recipient address multiple times, to ensure that they are sending funds to the intended recipient and avoid any potential loss of funds.

147

CryptoNick

625.00 TOKEN

posted 3 years ago

edited 3 years ago

147

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Category: Non-Constitutional AIPs

Submitted by: Wellyngton

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Steps to Implement

Timeline

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Category: Non-Constitutional AIPs

Submitted by: Wellyngton

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Steps to Implement

Timeline

Category: Non-Constitutional AIPs

Submitted by: Wellyngton

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Steps to Implement

Timeline

Category: Non-Constitutional AIPs

Submitted by: Wellyngton

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Steps to Implement

Timeline

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Proposal: Return funds to arb users who sent their airdrop tokens to the contract address

Article: The Arbitrum Foundation

What is Arbitrum?

Article: The Arbitrum Foundation

What is Arbitrum?

The Role of the Arbitrum Foundation

Article: The Arbitrum Foundation

What is Arbitrum?

Article: The Arbitrum Foundation

What is Arbitrum?

The Role of the Arbitrum Foundation

Bro I accept the fact that my tokens were stolen.

Bro I accept the fact that my tokens were stolen.

Hi all!

Hi all!

Side Note on Sybils

Sybil Detection Solutions

Mechanism Design Solutions

Side Note on Sybils

Sybil Detection Solutions

Mechanism Design Solutions