As a seasoned researcher with years of experience in analyzing financial institutions and their practices, this WazirX incident has raised some red flags for me. The series of events leading up to the polling process appears to be fraught with confusion and inconsistencies.
On Wednesday evening, the WazirX management disclosed their answers to the questions posed during the Singapore court hearing on September 26th, via email to those who had inquired.
As a concerned crypto investor, I recently became aware that an email meant exclusively for those who had earlier signaled their backing for the moratorium was accidentally distributed to around 9,000 users who hadn’t expressed support. This oversight understandably stirred up some confusion and potentially affected trust in the polling process. To remedy this situation, I promptly dispatched a clarifying email on September 7th, 2024, to those impacted users, providing an explanation for the error.
At first, cryptocurrency exchange WazirX requested informal user support for their moratorium application by sharing a survey. Initially, only a “Yes” option was provided for users to vote. Following instructions from a Singapore Court judge, WazirX management added “No” and “No Position” options on September 12, and concluded the poll on September 21.
WazirX Dubious Survey
In a report submitted to the Singapore Court, WazirX officials shared that out of the total 4.4 million creditors, approximately 78,011 took part in the survey, accounting for claims amounting to $82 million. Out of these participants, around 92.45% or roughly $64 million worth of claims were represented by the 72,120 respondents who voted in favor of the moratorium application.
Conversely, I find that a significant number of creditors, totaling approximately 1,491 and representing around 1.91% of all claimants, have expressed opposition to the moratorium application. Their combined claims amount to roughly $203 million.
At the court proceeding, Ujjwal Rattan expressed his worry in the discussion area as he had not taken part, but his votes were still registered in favor following the receipt of a ‘Thank you’ email.
It’s important to note that on September 13, the actual voting with all three options began, whereas earlier, only a ‘Yes’ option was presented. Previously, WazirX classified this vote as informal; however, they are now incorporating these findings into their official documents.
It’s possible that those who were against the moratorium simply chose not to engage with it, which might explain why only 78,011 users took part in the poll and a majority favored ‘Yes’.
Subsequently, on September 12 following a court decision, WazirX introduced new voting choices: ‘No’ and ‘No Position’. The updated vote took place until September 21.
It’s clear that this error not only led to perplexity but also sparked doubts about the authenticity of the voting procedure. Later, WazirX administration clarified that the initial emails were meant solely for those who had expressed backing for the moratorium. A subsequent apology email was dispatched on September 7 to rectify the oversight.
Conclusion
Initially, as a researcher, I found that WazirX did not engage an external entity to verify their initial poll results. However, subsequent judicial orders now mandate that any future voting related to court matters on their platform must be overseen by an independent third party. This move is intended to ensure maximum transparency for all parties involved, including creditors and the court itself.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-10-17 13:12