Hi Undead8,
I see you link to the code on the bsc scan. is this code the same that is on github for venus?
Or what you see in bsc scan is the deployed code?
Could you point to where in the code in github they make sure the supply and borrow APY has to be the same per token?
When I searched for setVenusSpeed () in the code in the bsc scan link I can only find this:
Thanks for the informative post though 
Hi, as previous replies, I’m fully agree with @dododot and @IbizarrePT.
Not to mention that on Telegram, they ban or delete most of messages on that topic…
I don’t think that this is the right way of addressing justified concern.
That’s frightening!
can we have the list of 93 addresses that are currently borrowing?
@XK11 - The code on bscscan is the one that is deployed. I did not check on github.
The setVenusSpeed() function is in File 1 of 20: Comptroller.sol. It points to the setVenusSpeedInternal() function (the code of that function is below). As you can see, you can only feed one uint venusSpeed parameter and that parameter updates the venusSpeed mapping (found in File 5 of 20: ComptrollerStorage.sol). Bottom line, there is only one venusSpeed for each vToken for both borrow and supply.
function setVenusSpeedInternal(VToken vToken, uint venusSpeed) internal {
uint currentVenusSpeed = venusSpeeds[address(vToken)];
if (currentVenusSpeed != 0) {
// note that XVS speed could be set to 0 to halt liquidity rewards for a market
Exp memory borrowIndex = Exp({mantissa: vToken.borrowIndex()});
updateVenusSupplyIndex(address(vToken));
updateVenusBorrowIndex(address(vToken), borrowIndex);
} else if (venusSpeed != 0) {
// Add the XVS market
Market storage market = markets[address(vToken)];
require(market.isListed == true, "venus market is not listed");
if (venusSupplyState[address(vToken)].index == 0 && venusSupplyState[address(vToken)].block == 0) {
venusSupplyState[address(vToken)] = VenusMarketState({
index: venusInitialIndex,
block: safe32(getBlockNumber(), "block number exceeds 32 bits")
});
}
if (venusBorrowState[address(vToken)].index == 0 && venusBorrowState[address(vToken)].block == 0) {
venusBorrowState[address(vToken)] = VenusMarketState({
index: venusInitialIndex,
block: safe32(getBlockNumber(), "block number exceeds 32 bits")
});
}
}
if (currentVenusSpeed != venusSpeed) {
venusSpeeds[address(vToken)] = venusSpeed;
emit VenusSpeedUpdated(vToken, venusSpeed);
}
}@Undead8 thank you so much. Finally somebody could make sense of this. So your thinking on the previous post is that we have no idea how many parts of the code are dependent on the set venusSpeed hence we might need an audit on something that changed this?
At least now I have somewhere to begin looking.
Also you seem to understand code(maybe more than understand) and if you were willing to help on creating a PR and a get ready a proposal for this please let know.
Have we heard an update from the team? This is a seriously greasy thing for the devs to be doing…
@XK11 Setting the XVS distribution rate to 0 for both supply and borrow of vXVS is relatively straightforward. We need a proposal that does just that. What is complicated is changing the comptroller to allow setting different rates for supply and borrow.
However, you need 600000 XVS just to be able to submit a proposal (that’s almost 30M$). I don’t know who has that besides the stripe team (address). Bottom line, if stripe is not doing it, it’s not going to happen.
Can we stop pretending this is not a huge problem? The STRIPE team has hijacked this project and the community has 0 input on governance. The STRIPE team needs to fix things before it goes beyond repair. Please understand, although Venus has a lot of utility, the community will not stay loyal to a team that backstabs them and refuses to listen to that said community on the topic of governance.
Lol. Typo. Meant Swipe not Stripe. The problem is with the Swipe team.
Hello how can we get what are the borrowers addresses from the smart contract?
I was searching for the function but i can only find form and address the amount of XVS borrowed?
Does anyone knows?
It is so obvious that the insider are the owner for most of these 94 wallet. So why would they want to fix?
And not just that, this kind of discussion would get you banned in Venus official telegram chat group and price chat group!!
Venus official & price telegram chat group admin has become notorious in banning people who asked constructive questions that is slightly negative for venus even though it is true and factual.
So please join our Venus Open Discussion Telegram: Join Group Chat
The purpose of this new group is to allow people to freely/openly discuss about Venus project & price, whether positive or negative, so long it is true, not rude and not intentionally creating FUD, you won’t be banned like what Venus official and price chat group admin did. Please help to invite relevant members that wants a freer discussion in.
I was banned from the group without explanation just because I asked this below :
Can someone verify? yesterday there was a discussion about the venus team was not that active recently on developments, there was very little update or commit on the code on Feb in github, then none at all for March. Is the venus team really not active anymore or taking a break or ? See it here Contributors to VenusProtocol/venus-protocol · GitHub
Lets all start tweeting to CZ_binance about it.
Binance backs the project and the protocol so why not loop him in on this?
At the same time we literally need everyone in the community to band together and find more than 600K XVS
CZ can’t ignore that issue and silence means consent…
However regarding this tweet from Binance I hope they can push the Venus’s decentralization further too.
“Controversy brings discussions and move the community further”
Cant believe the team didn’t fix this already.
should be priority number 1