/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>53707052
What the fuck is that? I don't remember this being here before

>>53707077
HOW DO I UNSTAKE

>We reserve the right to disable access to the Interface at any time, with or without cause or good reason

top fucking kek

>BY ACCESSING AND USING THE INTERFACE TO STAKE TOKENS ON THE CHAINLINK NETWORK, YOU WILL BE RESTRICTED FROM UNSTAKING ANY LINK TOKENS UNTIL THE CHAINLINK NETWORK STAKING MECHANISM HAS BEEN UPGRADED. WHILE SUCH AN UPGRADE IS ANTICIPATED, WE CAN MAKE NO GUARANTEE THAT IT WILL BE TIMELY OR THAT ANY STAKED LINK WILL BE ABLE TO BE UNSTAKED AT A SPECIFIC TIME IN THE FUTURE

my god this is amazing, con artists that ended up naming themselves smart cons

>>53707204
>smart
>con

>>53707150
>YOU ARE WAIVING YOUR RIGHT TO A TRIAL BY JURY OR TO PARTICIPATE AS A PLAINTIFF OR CLASS MEMBER IN ANY PURPORTED CLASS ACTION OR REPRESENTATIVE PROCEEDING
kek, imagine agreeing to something like this

lol, I have 7k staked and even I have to laugh at those terms of service. Fancy way of saying "we can't guarantee that you'll ever be able to unstake." Nice.

It's really over, isn't it?

>>53707241
I wasn't presented these terms prior to staking. At least I don't remember being presented them. Were these shown at the time of staking? Or were these recently added?

>You must bring any and all Disputes against us in your individual capacity and not as a plaintiff in or member of any purported class action, collective action, private attorney general action, or other representative proceeding. This provision applies to class arbitration. You and we both agree to waive the right to demand a trial by jury.

This is the setup. Soon, they will announce SEC enforcement against their smart con staking, and your tokens will be locked up indefinitely while Chainlink goes to court with the SEC.

>>53707293
I stacked 15% of my stack and I don't remember that shit either
could it be for general access only?

>>53707293
>Were these shown at the time of staking?
Yes, there was an entire wave of fud for that alone.

It's literally just Sergey keeping Gensler quiet. Same why there's the alert button, pretty based if you ask me.

>>53707150
>There can be no guarantee that any of the contemplated features of the Chainlink Network will be implemented as specified or at all

>>53707386
kek, I have a decent amount staked and locked but I really can't see how you manage to spin this as a positive

>>53707386
>>53707418
I agree. I don't think it is "based" being told that there is no guarantee that I'll ever be able to get my $50k back that I staked. But maybe we have different definitions of "based"

>>53707386
>Y-yes this is so based
>This is just a thing guys, no big deal!

Neither was Celsius, Linkpool, or Bancor. Sergey just can't stop his con artist ways, he is the SMART CON for fuck's sake

I thought "truth>trust" was pretty based but now I have to explicitly trust that I'll ever get my money back and I apparently can take no recourse should I not get it back.

Feels very similar to the whole vaccine thing...

>>53707416
I don’t see how this point can be overlooked along with the first paragraph. If they wanted, they could just not implement unstaking while the stakers just lose it all, “accepting the risk” with this user agreement. The same goes for anything else they have discussed/posted about earlier.

>>53707416
>>53707592
Hence ending 2022 without CCIP, any sort of enterprise abstraction layer, a visible reputation system, DECO, t-sigs, on and on.

>>53707592
>>53707736
it's over

>>53707592
Alright for this reply and all the other mushy-brain dumb-fuck retarded fudders in this thread:
I'm sorry to tell you but they're going to allow unstaking. If they didn't it would be reputational suicide. Everyone worth anything at all who's interested in oracles would never consider Chainlink again if they colossally fucked their community publicly and on full display by never allowing unstaking

This is classic legalese to avoid responsibility and avoid corporate communication being held as legal ammunition. It's like the McDonald's hot cup of coffee shit, no joke. If you guys have never read a contract or terms of service in your life this is completely standard course for fucking everything you do or "own" that involves risk from another party.

Anyone getting a boner off this is genuinely below 110 IQ and should unironically sell and suck off the business end of a shotgun

>>53707386
Thos is unironically correct

>>53707791
>This is classic legalese to avoid responsibility

>>53707150
>HOW DO I UNSTAKE

>>53707150
>>53707204
Bullish, locked tokens would be a great burn

>>53707150
Hahahahahaha

>>53707791
>it would be reputational suicide
yes but I think in such an event, their reputation would probably be the least of their concerns

>>53707273
It's completely and irrevocably over.

>>53707548
truth > trust for everything else except the entirety of Chainlinks operations. That will remain completely opaque, because fuck you.

>>53707791
I don't know if you've noticed but they have already committed complete reputational suicide by being absolute niggers to their community. Btw we've partnered with MOAB token!

>>53707150
explain me how you can lock your tokens into staking when no terms of service were presented initially. then after staking launches they can release TOS that you literally have to accept with no way of retroactively saying "i don't agree to this, release my tokens".

>>53708164
kek if you don't like that one, boy do I have the perfect lady for you! You're in luck!

>>53708194
>when no terms of service were presented initially
Yes they were, as soon as it went live with open slots

>>53708609
I don't remember it but you could be right
I can't believe I didn't even bother to open it before ticking the box lmao
thanks for this thread anons, I feel slightly more retarded now

>>53707418
>>53707528
it is a completely standard practice, all serious projects had such TOS including eth staking

the reason why talking about it is a meme is because LINK is continuously put on a ridiculous spotlight, more than all of crypto combined

there was a picture comparing the reaction between ETH and LINK TOS that perfectly exposed this bias; ETH had ~20 /biz/ posts complaining about it after months of release, LINK had 200+ posts within days
so considering the fact that ETH has around 60x times the marketcap of LINK, we are talking about a reaction more disproportionate than jewish prevalence in positions of power

>>53707150
Fuck you for making me read this. Never in a million years would I have thought I would read some pointless drivel about accepting consequences. As a result, I am now held liable for my own actions due to my personal knowledge about having staked 7,000 LINK. I have waived my rights and thus any future anger I may have towards the Chainlink network. I now accept my full responsibility. Sergey, my tokens are yours to do with what you please.

>>53707204
>bulwarking against aggressive SEC and regulations
Damn, why would they do that!

>>53708974
>all serious projects had such TOS including eth staking
I can't seem to find their TOS, any sources would be appreciated

>>53707150
This won't hold up in court since they added the ToS after you staked. There is plenty of precedent for things like this happening and then getting struck down in court.

>>53707150
>Terms of Service
>Last updated: November 4, 2022
>>53710931
>they added the ToS after you staked
Staking opened on December 6, 2022

Remind me, how does time work again? Do we go forwards or backwards?

>>53711148
Bold move asking 4chan that question. Most would probably argue the latter

SmartCon
noun
1. a gathering of smart con persons of color
2. a branded Chainlink convention

LMMMAAOOOO