Secure Funds
To prevent potential mismanagement of Youdle DAO treasury funds, we propose temporarily transferring these assets to the Kusama Treasury, which is now the safest option.
Rationale:
The Invarch team, which currently controls the funds, has a history of questionable financial decisions, including the transfer of more than 200K ASTAR from the DAO to a CEX without transparency.
Community members have raised concerns and asked questions about fund management, but the team has not provided clear answers.
To ensure responsible management, these remaining funds (400 KSM) should be safeguarded under Kusama governance.
Next Steps:
The funds will later be returned to Youdle DAO holders through a transparent and verifiable process.
We urge the community to support this measure to protect DAO resources.
Evidence:
Rug on virtuals
Polkadot treasury rugs
Youdle DAO rug
Moving DAO funds to a CEX because it's a shared address instead of moving to another on chain address? No answers.
Pink rug
Pink distributed by the pink team to invarch was supposed to get distributed to the community
but instead 2000000 pink were allocated to xcastronaut (invarch founder) wallet
Then went to hydration and got sold.
VARCH rug
$VARCH token launched less than 30 days ago. ICO investors are down -96%
KSM partial rug
Not fully delivered.
Tinkernet rug
Tinkernet (kusama parachain) was shutdown. Investors were given 4 VARCH for 1 TINKER. VARCH was later a rug so this converts Tinkernet in a rug. Before shuting down they made an LBP in Osmosis (Cosmos) which also was a rug.
We want to move Youdle DAO's money to a safer place called Kusama Treasury. The people who control the money now, Invarch team, have made some bad choices with the money before. They moved a lot of ASTAR money without telling anyone. People are worried and want to know what's going on, but the team doesn't give clear answers.
To keep the money safe, we should move the rest of the money (400 KSM) to Kusama, where it can be managed better. Later, we will give the money back to Youdle DAO in a way that everyone can see and trust. We hope everyone will agree with this plan to keep the DAO's money safe.
Here are some examples of why we don't trust the Invarch team:
- They moved money to a place called CEX without a good reason.
- They were supposed to share Pink tokens with the community, but they gave a lot to their own founder instead.
- They launched a new token called VARCH, and people who bought it lost a lot of money.
- They didn't give all the KSM tokens they promised.
- They shut down a project called Tinkernet and gave people VARCH tokens instead, which turned out to be bad too.
- 0.0%
- 0.0%
- 0.0%
Threshold
The proposer hasn't yet set (or verified) its identity. They're claiming potential mismanagement, yet no concrete, precise, and indisputable evidence has been given (e.g. plans or written proof that there's a plot to steal resources) besides the fact that the team that's being accused with these charges has failed to accurately meet promised milestones (not very unusual, as many others have in the past in the ecosystem), and using CEXes (something almost every major team that's aimed to secure budgets with stablecoins has done in the past), and raised concerns (from whom? I ask).
If I'm not confident about the proposer's identity, nor is there evidence given, how can I be sure there isn't a conflict of interest behind this series of proposals (a potential retaliation against one or more team members)?
At this point, I'm seeing two potential motivations, neither better than the other:
This is a SERIOUS accusation that raises doubts about the proposer's intentions. I should Nay this until have been provided with evidence or at least verified that there are no conflicts of interest behind this proposal.
Final remarks
Another thing to mention is that (again) this proposal probably would have no effects whatsoever (like the previous one) if the proposer's claims are valid. If they are, and the team is trying to steal or mismanage funds, they could get away with the 400 KSM now that they know there's an open proposal to get them "slashed". Of course, there's no other alternative (technically speaking), but still, I see this ref. going nowhere.
Additional note: The proposer doesn't have enough funds to reserve for the decision deposit on this and their former ref. Will someone provide for it?