Proposal: We Demand a Formal Explanation on These Issues From the Sushi Team

Summary
We need closure from the team on the facts before we decide on pay and who to hire. If the details are true this will change how we decide on pay and hiring.

I propose that the team give us a written formal explanation on these facts. Tweeting that it is bad journalism is not a good response.

We need confirmation on the bitdao deal, who got the money from joe’s dona sale and why did he do this while working for sushi, what was the process on removing maki and who agreed on it.

Motivation
We need confidence in the team or we will fail again. If any team member acted bad they need to be removed and a new person hired for the role.

Specification
We the sushi community demand a written formal explanation on

The BitDAO Deal

Reference: there are 5 transactions of $500k us dollars worth of bitdao given to 5 wallets Ethereum Transaction Hash (Txhash) Details | Etherscan

Why was payment given to sushi members?

Who received these payments and what did they do with them?

Why was payment given directly to 5 members and not the whole team?

Why was this not diclosed?

**If any team member is using Sushi to make money without disclosing to the community and their team they should be fired for conflict of interest and bad fiduciary duty. No company allows this. We do not too. No punishment means they will do it again. **

I do not believe we can not replace any position in Sushi.

Did any team member do any other secret deals for payment using the Sushi brand?

The DONA Token Sale
Who conducted this token sale?

Who took the money from this sale?

Why did it use the Sushi name?

Firing 0xMaki
What was the process for firing 0xmaki?

Who proposed it?

Who voted on it?

Why was this not proposed to the community?

Internal Relationships

How are teams within sushi managed?

Are there any cliques or relationships that need to be disclosed for conflict of interest?

For
We need the team to answer these questions for the community. The community faith in the Sushi team is low. Discussing pay and team structure does not fix this without addressing issues and changing problematic team members.

Against
Nil

5 Likes

Adding poll for easy voting

  • For: We need the team to answer these questions for the community. The community faith in the Sushi team is low. Discussing pay and team structure does not fix this without addressing issues and changing problematic team members.
  • Against: NIL

0 voters

I think this investigative article should be linked - Rekt - Sushiswap Scandal It’s long but well worth the read. Things written here need to be addressed.

1 Like

Hello,

I will try to answer, to few questions, even if it’s not really my job to do this.

Why was payment given to sushi members?
After the success of the BitDAO auction, BitDAO granted us with a bonus

Who received these payments and what did they do with them?
The bonus came directly to the Sushiswap Operation Multisig

Why was payment given directly to 5 members and not the whole team?
They, I don’t who exactly, decided that 5 members should received 4x more than others team members.
An equal distribution would have been : 3,000,000 BitDAO / 22 = 136363.636 BitDAO .

The 5 members have returned, after many days, the excess.
So they already had the 136,000 BitDAO since August.
But the rest of the team still wait the rest of the bonus ( 136363-88245 = 48118 BitDAO ) since… 3 months, in the same time that the community wait the airdrop.

Keno has returned 100% of the bonus.

To be factual : On August 26, 2021, 2,999,995 BitDAO were distributed to core team members.

  • 17 members each received 88,235 BitDAO for a total of 1,499,995 BitDAO, or 50%
  • 5 members each received 300,000 BitDAO for a total of 1,500,000 BitDAO, or 50%

The 5 members in question are : Joseph, Keno, Omakase, Rachel and 0xdea6f114eed1bfa4d3f89d34d0b36bf9af9eb980

Why was this not diclosed?
I can’t answer, I don’t know.

What was the process for firing 0xmaki?
The screenshot that all people see on Twitter, it’s from my account.
As you can see, a simple vote on a telegram channel, where I voted NO.

Who proposed it?
The vote has been posted by Joseph, but I believe it’s after a call.

Who voted on it?
People present in the Sushi Dev group

Why was this not proposed to the community?
I don’t know, and trust me or not, I still don’t know why they wanted to fire 0xMaki.
I don’t know if 0xMaki made a mistake, and even, we have to be loyal to 0xMaki.

2 Likes

The 5 members have returned the " excess ", here is the details :

  • Joseph returned 136,000 BitDAO on September 09, and returned 16,734 BitDAO on November 16
  • Keno returned 300,000 BitDAO on September 30
  • Omakase exchanged 136.363 BitDAO, and sent 163.637 BitDAO to the address hominoideas.eth
  • Rachel kept and traded all of the 300,000 BitDAO, then received 51 Ether at another address owned by her, to purchase 136,000 BitDAO, then returned them.
  • Unidentified user returned 163.637 BitDAO, and kept 136.363
2 Likes

2 returned all of it and 3 return excess. 2 have guilty conscience 3 steal

joseph delong is rundaghouls on twitter and abandoned based community

Fwiw all have returned the extra share of the bonus. The “unknown” address is maki. Every dev was prompted to join the call where the discussion around maki happened.

Bumping this thread to be used as a nexus for any statements the implicated individuals will decide to make.

Would also raise the question about FujiDAO and possible coercion of the core to sign legal contracts.

I don’t think an explanation from the team will suffice. This isn’t because it will be true or false - that’s irrelevant. The only way the community can regain trust is if the truth is verified by an external party. Reestablish credibility with comprehensive third-party audit by Shipyard - #4 by markshipyard

2 Likes

Yeah, it certainly won’t. But if we, as a community, may exercise public pressure on Core to enforce compliance, there’s no such leverage against Shipyard.

And since you do not announce the cost of your audit (not that the core would ever put a binding vote for it), how would we ever know to trust its results? How would we ensure that no collusion taken place, and the whichever report you end up producing is accurate?

Community can vote on compensation after-the-fact based on actual results of our work.

By now it is clear that the people in charge cannot remain covered by anonymity. You can’t denunciation ( i hope to saranno so) a nickname to the police. When there is hiring you can ask what your addresses are, if you then discover dubious practices on addresses that you have not reported you could deduce bad faith.
It is not mandatory to indicate all your addresses, but only those that you consider useful to report if you want to work

they can, as long as they they also answer for what they do - instead of just blockig away those that show the facts

is it on all posts that replies are disabled and need approval, or just on some?

I need approval from a moderator to comment or reply on the Constitution post
are links disabled from starters in this community?