Demand return of funds from ion dao

@JohnnyWyles the wording here reflects the reality that the DAO isn’t really the right way to address this. I think that at this time we should leave the process to the funded people / teams. Hopefully they will respond here.

I also tagged them on Twitter / X, but zero response.

That is bad.

I don’t know that there is more that we can do.

RIP ion

Hey, I just spoke with Jiwon from manythings.

It seems that the ions are in a vesting account, with 5 year vesting.

He let me know that they’d be writing a software upgrade that:

  • completes the vesting
  • takes the liquid ions, and sends them to the community pool using MsgFundCommunityPool.

I’ll link this post to him, too, so that if there’s anything more to update, it can be updated here.


This is interesting in general, but the question is if it is desired all together. Because it can also be used (potentially) in the future to lure investors to a project with long vested periods, and unlock them using this code when the price is nice and dump it to 0 with the freshly unlocked assets ^^

I also spoke to Jiwon yesterday. I think the vesting unlock should automatically return the ION to the ION DAO. Unlocking into the same account that they are vesting to is very trusting of the ION DAO - I don’t believe ManyThings would dump the lot, but the point of smart contracts is to remove the need for trust.

The ION DAO can then run a MsgFundCommunityPool, bring forward an alternative proposal for using these IONs, or ask to retain them in the ION DAO.

They would only need to request them again if a developer was found to take over IBCX development or a secondary project.

1 Like

Has there been any further communication with ManyThings?

The team no longer responds on Telegram and they continue to receive ION.

No, I’ve pinged them a few times with no response since the above message.

@faddat have you had any contact around this software upgrade they were writing?

1 Like

Is that not something which can be stopped via the ION DAO if the DAO-holders disagree with providing more income without a proof of work?

ManyThings is required for changes to the vesting contract and they have gone silent.

The DAO is stymied.

O wow, so it all hinges on 1 party to be able to start changes?

That is a bad situation in all cases…
Lesson 101 on accountability is that you always need 2-3 players minimum.


Nope. But didn’t something just go on chain?

Doesn’t look like it - anything ION DAO would upload needs to go through their governance at

1 Like

Welp that’s not great.