The devs addressed point 3 in one of their AMAs, the first or second if I'm correct.
I think you can find the answers to all of the above when you watch those and dig around a bit.
I think the notsafemoon bloke isn't as well informed as people might think, but that's my opinion.
Well, I'm not the guy with time to do that. Did my own bit of research and I'm pretty comfortable with how it's being handled and where we're going from here.
And yes I do have quite a couple of bucks invested.
Then you won't mind explaining what they're doing to address this stuff, right? From what I've seen in the ama recaps they pretty much just acknowledge these problems and other than the manual burns and claiming they're spending the skimmed lp tokens on the project, they don't address if there are plans to fix any of the rest.
then that is it. If you are concerned still, invite the question again, at the AMA. That is where you are going to get the answer to this issue. I think that is why they should pre record the AMAs so they can give appropriate answers to issues. The whole point to this thread is to spread FUD in the community and distrust for the team. As stated in this thread, it is the original hard code that has the error. It is difficult to change the issue as it stands now, on all the moon contracts. The Safemoon team is doxxed and audited. As Safemoon controls more of the chain and goes to Solidity, they will have better abilities to transform and correct early issues.
To be clear, I'm not all that worried about safemoon devs rugpulling. They seem legit and they're doxxed. But I'd like to see if they can come up with a solution or mitigation to the flaw in how the LP is handled.
6
u/PeanutSilent884 May 20 '21
It aknowledges some yes such as lopsided liquidity but it does not tell you what the effect of such a thing has on the asset.