• Dilan Asatekin [Founder-Imperator.co,Osmosisi Labs]
• Zafercan Çakır [Founder-Stake-Relax Validatör]
• Mert Fırat [İhtiyaç Haritası Ahbap organization]
• Nova Ratio and 0xwilds (Prop#101 original proposer in this forum post)
Hello, Cosmos Hub Community.
Fully acknowledging its good will, it saddens me to say, unfortunately, that with no update from the original proposer since Feb/Mar 2023 and upon revisiting the Aid Proposal for Earthquake Survivors in Türkiye, some community members have voiced their opinions to effectively retrieve these funds back to our Cosmos Hub Community Pool (CP). The ATOMs have been remaining idle, while collecting rewards, with >250+ pages of tx since the passing of the prop.
In a recent X post (Aug 25, 2024), regarding a different topic, it seems Imperator honorably made aware this proposal was a misaligned use of governance and CP spending:
Attempting to uphold the initial integrity of our collective CP, battling against the current climate, this signaling proposal aims to officially and formally request retrieval of all funds from the recipient wallet back the pool.
Thank you, @tknox35 for the correction. Edit has been made.
With you there regarding not wanting this proposal to have passed in the first place. Fascinating and extremely concerning, however. Upon writing this signaling proposal, the funds were present but within 7 hours, it’s gone with no tx showing funds being moved?
This is too late to do anything here IMO. The address you added seems to me like it is some exchange although I could be wrong we do not know about the entity, person behind that account.
And how do you plan to return those assets? Even if this proposal passes you cannot force the coins to be sent without heavy modification to the chain itself.
If we ask those organisations to give the tokens back I do not think we have a legal cause to ask for the tokens since it was a donation and I do not know was there any sort of contact? The only way I could see ATOM tokens getting back is if we prove that the money never reached those people that needed the aid in the first place. I am not a lawyer but from my perspective the Network does not have a leg to stand on this matter.
To be clear I support this proposal but correct me if I am wrong hereI do not see a way to enforce any of the request without legal work, or without doing a Juno, doing a fork and taking the tokens from the another account which I guess is some sort of exchange which I think it would not be fair to this account/exchange whatever it is.
Who was owning the proposition and managing the fund for that?
It looks indeed hard to retrieve the funds from an exchange, but we can surely see with the person in charge and get more details about how the funds were used, how much remain, etc.
This is also why it’s important to have governance linked to worldwide juridictions and be able to operate off chain action/decision in case of grift/fraud.
According to Prop#860, retrievals, or “claw backs,” like this are indeed possible. Unsure, however, whether or not this wallet is an exchange address. If someone could help identify, would greatly appreciate your help.
I have checked the wallet and it looks like a CEX wallet. We can not tell if those funds were used or not if it is in the CEX wallet neither we can clawback i believe.
@wassie Thank you for taking the time to look into that. Would you mind sharing how you got to that conclusion? For personal reference moving forward, I’d greatly appreciate it.
@Guinch_Roze Agreed. At the least, we know which validators were in support of such a proposal, despite the good will behind it, at face value.
I applaud and thank you all for sharing your time for this honest effort, in light of collectively protecting the integrity of our Cosmos Hub CP. It’s questionable why more Hub leaders are not chiming into this conversation, especially when related to the CP. A sizable holding of ATOM staying idle, especially when tied to a reputable company like @Imperator.co , should not be acceptable!
Perhaps this was part of the broader strategy to indirectly centralize and takeover Hub governance.
I am not sure that this is a CEX account 100%, but i tend to think it is one, based on the account history with no stake or gov participation and all frequent inward transactions.
@wassie Thank you for responding and continuing to engage.
It didn’t click earlier, so thank you @wassie, but i’m very intrigued that this wallet continues to receive funds, almost on a DAILY basis, from this addr (cosmos10clzsllyngem5jyz3dpqsxu2x0p5533j7937yw):
How is this not concerning, NOR receiving interest, especially from those with more “power” / insider committees, who continue to prioritize re-routing peoples attention and draining funds instead of looking into issues like this?
I believe it is a CEX wallet, I further investigated sand each receive transaction has a memo in it. CEX’s cosmos wallet works in a way that there are couple of hot wallets and then cold wallets. Hot wallets receive funds and send some funds to the cold wallets. As deep as i am going it looks like a CEX wallet.
So, if it is actually a CEX wallet, then we cannot enforce anything, so maybe those funds ere actually used we can’t tell.
I hope you are well and thank you for looking into this further. As of today, the original funds that were transferred currently holds: 259,110.86 ATOM in the respective wallet. It curiously continues to receive transactions, now from different addresses:
cosmos1u5we9ww76a4s0ldqh8c5q4tzwvkxualf0anxfx
cosmos18ld4633yswcyjdklej3att6aw93nhlf7ce4v8u
with some funds being sent to:
cosmos1j8pp7zvcu9z8vd882m284j29fn2dszh05cqvf9 (an address that holds multiple other tokens)
If this wallet is indeed a CEX address, can understand we are not able to enforce anything, but regardless, why are we able to see the active on-chain data? If the original proposer utilized the funds solely to aid survivors, curious why any funds would be sent to an address with multiple tokens? @Imperator.co
Completely baffled Cosmos Hub leaders are not engaging this issue. The granted CP funds increasingly seem to be gained for personal advantage.
@FHZ Thank you for bringing this prop.
I fully support retrieving any funds possible to the CP from prop#101. CP spends without accountability is unforgivable. Accountability for any CP spend has to be established upfrond => ALWAYS, without exception. With prop #101 this was not the case and myself and many others have pointed this out on this forum/social media at the time.
Beside @Imperator.co there were several high profile members of Cosmos hub/influencers that agressively pushed prop#101. They have responsability here. It is indeed very disturbing that they now stay silent when it comes to accountability…
Hope all is well. Would be a shame for this endeavor to be closed, in light of retrieving these funds back to the CP, due to the lack of response from @nova_ratio, @Imperator.co, and related parties involved.
