Due to the multitude of different methods offered by various platforms for conducting their token swap, we can't be across the mechanisms of each of them, and even if we fully investigate impacts of each one, technically there is nothing that can be done from our end. We are a decentralised platform running on the Ethereum blockchain, that is why people love us, because it's secure, trust-less, and anonymous. But this also means that we don't have the control like centralised platforms (exchanges for example) to just change a couple of numbers on everyones screen and then suddenly it's all fine.
Essentially for token swaps (which happen often as more and more platforms come live), it doesn't make any sense for the borrower to not pay the loan back and do the swap... there is no financial incentive (infact there is a financial disincentive to not pay back the loan before the end of the token swap period as loans are over-collateralised).
I see you guys are quoting me now, does this mean I'm famous, perhaps Shakespearian even?
Token swaps are an interesting problem, essentially as I mentioned it should really be a self-regulating process whereby the borrowers will always pay back the loan prior to the token swap end date, assuming rational behaviour from the borrower.
Leaving the collateral in the contract is seen as irrational due to the fact that the amount they have to pay back will always be less than what they stand to gain by paying the loan back, as if the collateral was worth less than the loan, a rational lender would perform a collateral call, and do the swap/sell the tokens themselves.
that wiill be interesting . Cause technically the ven will be held in a contract during when a snapshot is taken , It the borrwer has the priv key does that mean they can default on payment and claim the Vet tokens? those tokes ain going to to be transferable in Nov
The borrower doesn't have the private key to the smart contract, if VEN tokens were stuck in the contract after the token swap/snapshot end date, they would essentially be irrecoverable.
---
It's a 2 sided debate, as with a lot of decentralised applications, the idea behind decentralisation is that things run exactly as programmed, i.e. there is no censorship, we can't just change a database and suddenly everyone has new tokens from a different chain. But as a company, what should our focus be on? Ensuring that there is no possibility that potential platform/token swap tokens are able to be used as collateral? Or is it the borrowers/lenders responsibility? How much censorship/control is necessary, and if we start controlling everything, is there still a reason to be decentralised?
