Binance Square

FormerMarketDao

1,068 views
3 Discussing
shahzi crypto master
--
Bearish
$FORM /USDT Market Overview --- Current Price: → $1.9882 (-1.61%) --- 24H Trading Range: High: $2.0254 Low: $1.9417 --- 24H Volume: FORM Volume: 10.68 Million USDT Volume: 21.20 Million --- Moving Averages (MA): MA(7): $1.9912 MA(25): $1.9925 MA(99): $1.9817 --- Key Levels: Resistance: R1: $2.0254 (24H High) R2: $2.0450 R3: $2.0800 Support: S1: $1.9766 S2: $1.9612 S3: $1.9492 S4: $1.9417 (24H Low) --- Market Sentiment: → Neutral to Slight Bearish → Price under MA(7) & MA(25) → Weak Momentum → Support holding above $1.9417 critical --- Suggested Trading Strategy: Swing Trade Plan: --- Summary: If FORM holds above $1.9450, bullish bounce likely. Breakout confirmation needed above $2.0254 for continuation. Ideal to buy dips near $1.9450 - $1.9610 zone. Watch Volume & MA breakout on shorter timeframes. --- Would you like: Scalping Strategy? Chart Image with Buy/Sell Zones? Auto Bot Strategy Conditions? #FORM #CPI&JoblessClaimsWatch #FormerMarketDao #SecureYourAssets #BinanceHODLerBABY {spot}(FORMUSDT)
$FORM /USDT Market Overview

---

Current Price:

→ $1.9882 (-1.61%)

---

24H Trading Range:

High: $2.0254

Low: $1.9417

---

24H Volume:

FORM Volume: 10.68 Million

USDT Volume: 21.20 Million

---

Moving Averages (MA):

MA(7): $1.9912

MA(25): $1.9925

MA(99): $1.9817

---

Key Levels:

Resistance:

R1: $2.0254 (24H High)

R2: $2.0450

R3: $2.0800

Support:

S1: $1.9766

S2: $1.9612

S3: $1.9492

S4: $1.9417 (24H Low)

---

Market Sentiment:

→ Neutral to Slight Bearish
→ Price under MA(7) & MA(25) → Weak Momentum
→ Support holding above $1.9417 critical

---

Suggested Trading Strategy:

Swing Trade Plan:

---

Summary:

If FORM holds above $1.9450, bullish bounce likely.

Breakout confirmation needed above $2.0254 for continuation.

Ideal to buy dips near $1.9450 - $1.9610 zone.

Watch Volume & MA breakout on shorter timeframes.

---

Would you like:

Scalping Strategy?

Chart Image with Buy/Sell Zones?

Auto Bot Strategy Conditions?
#FORM #CPI&JoblessClaimsWatch #FormerMarketDao #SecureYourAssets #BinanceHODLerBABY
BinaryX (BNX) Rebranding to Four (FORM): The exchange completed the token swap and rebranding of BNX to FORM, with deposits and spot trading for the FORM/USDT pair commencing on March 19, 2025. #BNX/USDT #FormerMarketDao $BNB {spot}(BNBUSDT)
BinaryX (BNX) Rebranding to Four (FORM): The exchange completed the token swap and rebranding of BNX to FORM, with deposits and spot trading for the FORM/USDT pair commencing on March 19, 2025. #BNX/USDT #FormerMarketDao $BNB
Sky (Former MakerDAO) Faces Emergency Governance Scandal RumorsMakerDAO changed the rules for borrowing USDS overnight. Who is behind this hasty decision? Is there an interest group trying to seize power at this leading DeFi protocol? Social network X is making waves in the news of an unusual emergency governance vote at MakerDAO, the leading decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol. This incident raises many questions about the transparency and fairness of MakerDAO's governance system, and raises big questions about the future of decentralized governance. It all started with an urgent proposal that suddenly appeared on the MakerDAO forum on February 18, 2025. This proposal was passed in record speed, in just a short time. The main content of the proposal is to significantly increase the amount of USDS (MakerDAO's stablecoin) that can be borrowed using MKR (MakerDAO's governance token) as collateral, while lowering the collateral requirement from 200% to 125%. The reason given for this emergency proposal was "to protect against a potential administrative attack". However, it is worth mentioning that no actual attacks have been identified or announced. In addition, the proposal bypasses MakerDAO's standard governance processes, which require thorough discussion and voting time. Another notable point is that several community members of MakerDAO (@ImperiumPaper) were banned from the forum and other communication channels of the protocol in the middle of the vote. This raises doubts about whether there is an attempt to "silence" dissent. Many people question the authenticity of the reason for "protection from administrative attacks". It is unclear what kind of attack will be solved by increasing the amount of borrowing and reducing the mortgage requirements for MKR. Moreover, banning critics further raises doubts about the real motive behind the move. This comes as some MKR holders are interested in reforming to restore profitability and growth for MakerDAO after a long period of stagnation. GFX Labs, for example, submitted 5 reform proposals, all of which follow the process and are designed to improve governance and increase MKR value. These recommendations include: Request budget disclosure End discrimination against DAI holders in savings ratesTermination of mandatory anonymity for Maker contributorsRedirecting marketing budgets to cross-chain markets with growth potentialGuaranteed allocation of 25% SPK to MKR holders The contrast between these transparent reform proposals and the emergency proposal is controversial. While reform proposals follow the process, emergency proposals ignore the process. Moreover, it appears that proposals aimed at increasing the value of MKR under the rule are being moderated, while a sudden, overnight vote for unsafe lending to MKR was passed. The question is: Who will benefit from this move? Allowing more USDS to be borrowed in MKR with LTV is riskier than anywhere else in DeFi, right after the critics were silenced, is it a coincidence? Many people are concerned that this incident creates a dangerous precedent for DeFi governance. If votes can be rushed without a clear explanation, if critics can be banned for no reason, and if rules can be ignored whenever it is beneficial, then governance is a farce. It's worth mentioning that MakerDAO has a reputation for being a "boring but process-based" DAO that adheres to the rules and does everything right. Therefore, this incident became even more confusing. Many people question the real motive behind these actions and who is really behind pulling the strings. This incident is not only a problem for MakerDAO but also a problem with the integrity of DeFi governance. If a leading protocol can do this, what prevents others from doing the same? Is this the beginning of the collapse of decentralized decision-making? Some new information suggests that there may have been an attack on the Sky Ecosystem (part of MakerDAO). Accordingly, a group, including ImperiumPaper (who was banned by MakerDAO above), conspired to manipulate oracles to liquidate Runes and gain control. This plan is said to be related to the appropriation of the project's funds. However, these allegations have not been confirmed. #FormerMarketDao #NewsAboutCrypto

Sky (Former MakerDAO) Faces Emergency Governance Scandal Rumors

MakerDAO changed the rules for borrowing USDS overnight. Who is behind this hasty decision? Is there an interest group trying to seize power at this leading DeFi protocol?

Social network X is making waves in the news of an unusual emergency governance vote at MakerDAO, the leading decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol.
This incident raises many questions about the transparency and fairness of MakerDAO's governance system, and raises big questions about the future of decentralized governance.

It all started with an urgent proposal that suddenly appeared on the MakerDAO forum on February 18, 2025. This proposal was passed in record speed, in just a short time.
The main content of the proposal is to significantly increase the amount of USDS (MakerDAO's stablecoin) that can be borrowed using MKR (MakerDAO's governance token) as collateral, while lowering the collateral requirement from 200% to 125%.
The reason given for this emergency proposal was "to protect against a potential administrative attack". However, it is worth mentioning that no actual attacks have been identified or announced. In addition, the proposal bypasses MakerDAO's standard governance processes, which require thorough discussion and voting time.

Another notable point is that several community members of MakerDAO (@ImperiumPaper) were banned from the forum and other communication channels of the protocol in the middle of the vote. This raises doubts about whether there is an attempt to "silence" dissent.
Many people question the authenticity of the reason for "protection from administrative attacks". It is unclear what kind of attack will be solved by increasing the amount of borrowing and reducing the mortgage requirements for MKR. Moreover, banning critics further raises doubts about the real motive behind the move.
This comes as some MKR holders are interested in reforming to restore profitability and growth for MakerDAO after a long period of stagnation. GFX Labs, for example, submitted 5 reform proposals, all of which follow the process and are designed to improve governance and increase MKR value. These recommendations include:
Request budget disclosure
End discrimination against DAI holders in savings ratesTermination of mandatory anonymity for Maker contributorsRedirecting marketing budgets to cross-chain markets with growth potentialGuaranteed allocation of 25% SPK to MKR holders
The contrast between these transparent reform proposals and the emergency proposal is controversial. While reform proposals follow the process, emergency proposals ignore the process. Moreover, it appears that proposals aimed at increasing the value of MKR under the rule are being moderated, while a sudden, overnight vote for unsafe lending to MKR was passed.
The question is: Who will benefit from this move? Allowing more USDS to be borrowed in MKR with LTV is riskier than anywhere else in DeFi, right after the critics were silenced, is it a coincidence?

Many people are concerned that this incident creates a dangerous precedent for DeFi governance. If votes can be rushed without a clear explanation, if critics can be banned for no reason, and if rules can be ignored whenever it is beneficial, then governance is a farce.
It's worth mentioning that MakerDAO has a reputation for being a "boring but process-based" DAO that adheres to the rules and does everything right. Therefore, this incident became even more confusing. Many people question the real motive behind these actions and who is really behind pulling the strings.
This incident is not only a problem for MakerDAO but also a problem with the integrity of DeFi governance. If a leading protocol can do this, what prevents others from doing the same? Is this the beginning of the collapse of decentralized decision-making?

Some new information suggests that there may have been an attack on the Sky Ecosystem (part of MakerDAO).
Accordingly, a group, including ImperiumPaper (who was banned by MakerDAO above), conspired to manipulate oracles to liquidate Runes and gain control. This plan is said to be related to the appropriation of the project's funds. However, these allegations have not been confirmed.
#FormerMarketDao #NewsAboutCrypto
Login to explore more contents
Explore the latest crypto news
⚡️ Be a part of the latests discussions in crypto
💬 Interact with your favorite creators
👍 Enjoy content that interests you
Email / Phone number