@EKingofgam @HyperliquidX Good point. Strong PMF there for that.
Use the DEX narrative to avoid KYC requirements while still gating liquidity
English
Grail.eth
9.8K posts
Grail.eth
@graildoteth
pixel rich, dolla poor.
The world Katılım Mart 2022
1.2K Takip Edilen77.4K Takipçiler
To be a DEX or not to be a DEX, now that is the question for @HyperliquidX
Is Hyperliquid really a DEX or is it a CEX larping as a DEX.
Because actions like taking legit spot listings won from auction owners who paid out six figures, then handing them over to new, bigger cap companies look very much like what the Bybits, Bitgets, and Binances of the world do.
Is @chameleon_jeff just another CZ wearing the mask of decentralization while running his own CEX?
Where do you start to draw the line?
Yes, he's made some people very wealthy here. Yes, he's pushed the idea that a DEX can compete with a CEX.
But when you start to run things like the very CEXes you claim to disrupt, what are you really?
Just straight out admit you are a CEX larping as a DEX behind the narrative sham of decentralization.
Gurcan@millerefecte
The events are unrelated, but even a low-tier CEX like MEXC admits its mistake and issues refunds while @HyperliquidX doesn’t even bother to give an explanation. Trust is a one-time thing @chameleon_jeff x.com/arkham/status/…
English
@gazaonmymind @0xBriann @HyperliquidX I'd say he's starting to lean in that direction, at least given some of his recent decisions.
Early days and all, but give it a year or two and I think there's a chance of that.
English
@graildoteth @0xBriann @HyperliquidX You have lost your mind LMAO
Equating Jeff to CZ over this… the weight of those NFT bags get to your head?
English
That I agree with. The whole decentralization framework is mostly just a sham, especially when it comes to platforms that enable trading.
The market or 99% of the users don't give a shit about decentralization, really. They just want a product that works and is "safe" to use.
My point with Hyper is that it's being run like a CEX, not a DEX. Witness some of the decisions made when there has been order book drama in the past.
I'm not against what Hyper has built here or what they have accomplished. A lot of people love the product, a lot of people made a ton of money and are cultishly loyal. But I see the fingers of CZ in how Jeff runs shop. The difference is, CZ doesn't try to hide it.
English
@graildoteth @HyperliquidX There’s not a single decentralized front end in the entire space.
Blockchain is inherently backend technology.
Making a decision to change something about the front end doesn’t change anything about the underlying technology
English
@ScottPh77711570 @HyperliquidX how much did you pay for your ticker?
English
@graildoteth @HyperliquidX This is a complete misstatement of the facts
I bought a ticker, and knew exactly what I got and what I didn't get
NOBODY in the HL community is confused
Why are you confused?
English
Legally, they might be.
I can't argue that with you.
But ethically, they are not right.
There is the letter of the law, and then there is the spirit of the law.
Most of the buyers bought because of the distribution rights to the ticker (which basically functions as you ONCHAIN branding). That was the primary motivation for spending on the 'gas' as you call it.
English
GENESY / SHEEP / FARM
They have never been bought but bonded.
Many people like you speak but don’t know how work the auction on HyperLiquid Core. I understand the mistake on the 2 tickers and can be seen as « dishonest »
But STILL, legally they are in their right.
I will repeat it. EVERY team bought tickers without ANY promesses other than ONCHAIN reservation.
English
Listen
No one FORCED anyone to buy a tickers on HyperLiquid Core.
No promesses or clear rules about tickers on FRONT end was made.
You buy, the ticker, you have it ONCHAIN.
You will see across the CT people who have lost a lot of money because they SPECULATED on it. Now stop crying in the casino.
Grail.eth@graildoteth
To be a DEX or not to be a DEX, now that is the question for @HyperliquidX Is Hyperliquid really a DEX or is it a CEX larping as a DEX. Because actions like taking legit spot listings won from auction owners who paid out six figures, then handing them over to new, bigger cap companies look very much like what the Bybits, Bitgets, and Binances of the world do. Is @chameleon_jeff just another CZ wearing the mask of decentralization while running his own CEX? Where do you start to draw the line? Yes, he's made some people very wealthy here. Yes, he's pushed the idea that a DEX can compete with a CEX. But when you start to run things like the very CEXes you claim to disrupt, what are you really? Just straight out admit you are a CEX larping as a DEX behind the narrative sham of decentralization.
English
Now you might have a valid point there.
However, Hyper called the entire process "Spot listing ticker auction". I mean, sure if you dig into the tech docs, this might have been implied, or might not have been.
Some of the auction buyers should comment on this specifically. I'd like to get an opinion from one of the parties that bought a domain on what kind of material explaining the rights of what you 'bought' got you.
But either way Hyper leaned pretty hard into the fomo and hype that the auction buyers generated. They certainly did NOTHING at all to delineate the terms.
SO yea, I'm still leaning on Hyper going about this the wrong way.
English
@FarzanehMajidi @graildoteth @pondermint @HyperliquidX There IS a clear explanation in the documents though
There is no smoke here, no fire. Just fuckwits who didn't read very clear documents trying to start drama where literally nobody is complaining
Faggotry
English
I won't argue about the last line. The market is cruel.
But I'm still going to push back against what the Hyperteam did.
It was a business decision on their part, I get it. But it was the wrong decision ethically. Maybe no one here in this space gives a shit about that. I totally get that. No one cares about anything here but money, including the leading projects in this space.
But still this matters and someone needs to point it out.
English
@graildoteth @HyperliquidX Well the thing about Hyperliquid is they do exactly what they say and what they mean.
If the project hand max mindshare they front end would display pixelmon
Two different issues.
Winners win. Losers lose. Market is cruel.
English
You are a hypershill who will suck hyperdick regardless of what I say. Your entire identity is to suck off hyper.
So just fuck off.
Nothing you have said is factually correct, nor was this the basis of the argument I gave. The market cap of the token (which I agree with, is abysmal) is not the point here. The point is hyper sold a product and revoke the terms with NO sort of vote, due process or anything else. That's my issue with what happened.
English
@graildoteth @pondermint @HyperliquidX Pixelmon is literally a scam doing 1k volume
You are stupid and retarded if you think routing your users who want to buy Monad, buys a dead scam token instead
English
Fine, bag defence mode activated. I get it.
Let's just say we disagree and call it at that. I'm not going to waste bandwidth here on you. We may as well be arguing religions for all that's going to do.
None of this has to do with gaming or my bags. If you want to come at me with that, then go fuck off. I have no fucking problem bashing my own bags when merited, which is more than you can say about most of the people in this space who don't have the balls to do such.
Fine, bag defence mode activated. I get it.
It's the principle of what the team has done and how they have gone about it. Many of those auctioned spot listings were marketed as access to the front-end UI under that token and all the benefits that implied. The team did something I disagree with and will strongly keep on calling out Jeff and his whole cabal.
You don't want to see that and will find ways to justify. So be it.
English
Mate, you have cited so many tokens who didn’t paid the auction and did HypurrFun system. At this point, you have lost all credibility.
And no UI was not part of the deal. It’s a buy ONCHAIN Grail. For the dates, it’s a long process with both team. The big problem here, is that you all used this « problem » as weapon to say « rug » not even looking at your own problems. Thats wrong. Don’t weaponize a « mistake » who could have been probably solved with communication.
To end, top project talking about MON is a big NO. Let’s see on chain and talk about your users.
You are the one wanting to stop « gaming » and those stuff now you see an occasion to « explain » the failure. Not fair.
English
@ZeroMazed @jaysu @pondermint @HyperliquidX Yea, should have just called it renting or leasing with the terms (i.e. you can be kicked off the Hyperliquid front end at any point if they deem).
If the auction specified this, then there would be no pushback.
But they didn't specify it.
English
@jaysu @graildoteth @pondermint @HyperliquidX yeah man people really thought they were buying something when they just rented access lol
English
@BzhaoCrypto @Kevihaiceth @pondermint @HyperliquidX the @HyperliquidX sham
People are too fucking bag blind to call out the hypocrisy
English
yea I view @chameleon_jeff and the @HyperliquidX pretty close to having pulled a scam move here.
They get a lot of praise for creating a great platform for trading and making early backers rich.
But they failed completely here and what they have done undermines the entire message they like to preach.
No respect they are trying to just go silent on this and hope it goes away.
English
@graildoteth @HyperliquidX The entire spot auction system turned into a giant sham for multiple reasons. They should refund buyers and curate it how they please. Just call a spade a spade and operate as such. Such a minuscule % of their business.
English
Onchain ticker.
Brother in Christ, what can you do with an onchain ticker. Literally no one bought those spot auctions for that. They bought the distribution rights for their token to be accessable from the Hyper platform. That's what everyone who bought thought they were getting.
There is zero value there for anything else and it was certainly not sold as such.
So yea, Hyperliquid did wrong here. I'm calling that out.
English
@graildoteth @HyperliquidX Nothing was handed over.
They received exactly what they bought : the on chain ticker and the liquidity placement right on CORE
Thank you.
English
English
English
@Knox556 @HyperliquidX Yep. Everything is a story.
I just want to put it out there that Hyperliquid is not necessarly the goody too shoes. they are about bizness and are not afraid to do the dirty when it suits them.
Fine, but stop with the lies
English
@graildoteth @HyperliquidX All about narrative at the end of the day isn’t it
English
Sure, no argument there. Then stop with the sham of decentralization. Jeff and co are using that narrative to pimp their bags. When it comes to standing behind where and when it counts, they don’t.
Clearly a CEX DEX has a PMF and is profitable but just lean into being a slightly better Binance
English
@graildoteth @HyperliquidX Binance made many people very wealthy too
You may have a good point 🤷🏻♂️
English
Spent a lot of time thinking on this, and ultimately decided to just reset everything.
People saw this as a 1000% APR farm when that was never our intention—It was to bootstrap USDM supply for deep, stable conversions.
Depositors will get their money back + credit for the deposit time in the Rewards Campaign.
Pre-Deposit will re-open for it's original intention closer to Frontier opening where anyone can pre-load their USDm balance for a smoother day 1 experience.
MegaETH@megaeth
We've decided to return all funds raised from the Pre-Deposit Bridge. Execution was sloppy and expectations weren’t aligned with our goal of preloading collateral to guarantee 1:1 USDm conversion at mainnet. How this decision impacts you:
English
@graildoteth @GiulioXdotEth @HappyBuddha99 @HyperliquidX @Hypurr @Pixelmon omg you suck, just buy some hype man you'll feel better
English
This is disappointing to see, as a top @HyperliquidX holder, staker, and LP provider on multiple platforms and a holder of @Hypurr NFTs, I really don't want to FUD my own bags (my @Pixelmon bags are way smaller relatively), but this does seem like a breach of HYPE's core values and ethos...
I get it, HYPE grew really fast really quick, and of course not every decision can be perfect and appease all parties, but this would at the very least warrant a response from @chameleon_jeff @iliensinc , or maybe even a refund to the Pixelmon team @GiulioXdotEth who paid $500K for the ticker?
I really wish the best to both projects of course!
Akku@Akkukap
I’ve been a Hyperliquid maxi for a long time, and HL still remains my largest position in Web3. But a recent decision by the team has been extremely disappointing to see. Earlier this year, @monprotocol acquired the $MON ticker on HL for ~500k: x.com/monprotocol/st… The rationale was that CEX interactions were frustrating, and the Pixelmon team wanted to align with a fully decentralized venue. The token ultimately didn’t gain much traction on HL (very low volume, practically a waste in hindsight), but at least the team had secured an immutable asset. Fast forward to Monad’s launch, and suddenly the MON ticker on Hypercore now refers to Monad, not Pixelmon. So I checked with the Pixelmon team assuming they must have sold the ticker. Turns out they didn’t. Hyperliquid simply changed the frontend names: Pixelmon is now shown as “Monpro” on UI (but still $MON on-chain). Monad is shown as “Mon” on UI (but is actually $UMON on-chain). So technically the ticker is immutable, but from a consumer perspective the actual UI identity has been reassigned. And realistically, no one cares what the ticker is on-chain when the UI shows something else. If this isn’t effectively a ticker grab, what is it? Pixelmon paid 500k for something that the frontend can override at will, while Monad (or rather @unitxyz, who is clearly closer to the HL team) gets the visible name without paying for it. To be clear, this doesn’t materially affect Pixelmon’s future. But on principle, it’s wildly disappointing. Is this the ethos Hyperliquid wants to stand for? Centrally aligned players first? What message does this send to smaller teams who choose HL because they believed “listings without fuss” meant UI consistency and fairness? Are we now saying: “You can buy the on-chain ticker, but we’ll decide the visible name depending on who we talk to”? Tagging @chameleon_jeff @iliensinc because this seems like a serious breach of HL’s own stated values, and I’m not sure whether this decision was fully acknowledged at the top. For clarity: Pixelmon ($MON): 0x622cf551933f19f9136303dcab56488c Monad ($UMON): 0x58dae745c8c5fed4012f35ef39829c2d Frontend: This requires an explanation imo and its not about this particular case but more problematic for the overall direction team wants to take. To me this is a clear slap on the face of smaller teams being allowed to be strong-armed by privileged partners. @sershokunin can you also pitch in as to what happened here?
English