I want to discuss the lending issue which happend on Poloniex here as well.
Crosspost from Altcoin Discussion :
I lend out ETH on Poloniex during the HF.
After the Hardfork i just got back ETH(postfork) which was the new name of the major fork.
In my opinion this is just wrong, since the borrower agreed to lend ETH(prefork) and so hast to give me back ETH(prefork) which is now basically ETH(postfork) + Ethereum Classic.
I think they handled it wrong and gave the ETC to the borrower who just had to give back ETH(postfork) instead.
Their math example :
https://poloniex.com/press-releases/2016.07.26-responses-to-common-etc-questions/ is wrong as well imo :
Alice shorts ETH(prefork) by borrowing 200 ETH(prefork) from Bob and selling it to Carol. Carol, who used her own BTC to buy 200 ETH(prefork) in the spot market, withdraws all 200 ETH(prefork) to her Mist wallet ETH Hard Fork occurs Carol receives 200 ETC in her Mist wallet Because the 200 ETH(prefork) Bob lent out is no longer on Poloniex, there is no ETC to give him The only option is to create an additional loan contract that neither party agreed to, wherein Alice owes Bob 200 ETC in addition to 200 ETH Alice is forced to buy 200 ETC in a market she never entered to settle a debt
she never agreed to.This is wrong : Alice
agreed to the debt of 200 ETC , because she loaned
200ETH(prefork) which is divided to
200ETH and 200ETC after fork. In your calculation the lender basically could loose up to 49% of value depending on how his ETH(prefork) divides based on the community deciscion, which is just wrong!!! Alice shorted the value of ETH(prefork), so she is responsible for the loss prefork not postfork. She has to get the ETH(prefork) back, which is afterwards ETH+ETC. It could be also ETC being the winning chain, what about that ? so ETH is basically just the winning chain after a fork with lets say 80%, what about the other part of the original ETH ?
When you borrow, you receive an asset and a debt. But in this scenario, Alice is forced to “repay” a principle
she never received, and the terms of the loan are changed without the consent of either party.
Alice for
sure received the ETC, because it was priced in the ETH(prefork) already so she makes in this case no extra loss btw, because ETH(prefork) value will be divided up in ETH(postfork) + ETC so he can easyly buy with his prefork ETH ETH(postfork) + ETC.
There is nothing added , it is just split and usually after the split ETH+ETC < ETH(prefork) because communities use engery to battle each other first.
You could see this on the market as well, as soon as ETC starts trading, ETH(postfork) lost value.
Maybe this example will help. I lend someone a google stock, now the lender sells the google stock. Afterwards there happens a rebranding, google is now divided up to alphabet and gamma. So on the exchange gamma is rebranded in google , because it makes 80% of original google stock and alphabet only 20%, he only have to give back the google(gamma) part and not alphabet part?
Just because ETH after fork is called ETH, it is not the same like ETH ( prefork) IT is even completely different. It should be renamed to ETHF and ETHC. If you take this serious you could even say, that ETC has more right to be ETH now , because the code didn't change. So however you take it, the lender should definitely get his ETH(prefork) back which he can divide in ETH+ ETC as he wishes.
I think bitfinex handled it correct and gave the lenders back the ETH(prefork) which they can divide in ETH + ETC as their wish.
How do you think about this and is anyone else affected by this ?
