Happy to help, hope you'll get enough votes !

Sorry to hesr that, but i didn see how binance agree with this force transfer  or if this funds are really yours... i need some kind of proof on chain  or this could be a bad very bad idea

[@7MzX...AiVj](7MzX7ZWrD9TdU5j7Jru3TSMKxcqLtHYXXMcBte9dCPSgAiVj-hydradx)  The EVM address I am currently logged into, 0x16864cD0253df120AAC4113464f8E024f04a4629, and my hydration address, 7KATdGaienjW2hCZcqNLE83MqTdp5M94sULzbWUMLrYCuB2L, are the same wallet, and also the sender of this transaction: https://hydration.subscan.io/extrinsic/6620041-3. After this incident, I have undergone a long and arduous communication process with Binance. The Binance chat app has dozens of pages of chat history. However, it is regrettable that Binance has consistently stated that they cannot provide the wallet private key, so the on-chain verification cannot be completed at the moment. Nevertheless, I am still in communication with the Binance wallet team, hoping to find other effective verification methods

Can we get a **known good** to contact Binance and confirm anything? 

Are you sending the money back to the address you sent it from?

[@7PAU...Zqrk](7PAU47SuWQwTBwdLi42m1RyCKAvfSPhf5MaYqGExtKzoZqrk-hydradx)
He is, but we have no way to confirm the owner of 7P9y4pUmp5SJ4gKK3rFw6TvR24eqW7jVoyDs8LPunRYcHuzi is Binance and they are okay with this transfer. 

In theory, this could be Person A paid Person B (maybe Binance) for something, and Person A is now clawing it back because they know Person B is on vacation not paying attention. 

I believe the story we have been presented with, but I need more proof to support this action, because it has very bad optics in the eyes and opinions of some. It could even cost us a future Binance listing. 

[@Parakeet](7KejvRw4GZvVjFQEDefAsBRd9iaTjVeUWczB44Mgu8Bue8JW-hydradx) Since Binance currently does not support the hydration network, it is indeed impossible to prove that the address 7P9y4pUmp5SJ4gKK3rFw6TvR24eqW7jVoyDs8LPunRYcHuzi is associated with Binance. However, this address is actually the same wallet as my deposit address on Binance (Polkadot Asset Hub) 16ZQnKNNbkLWDyq5zJqSJhAeJVeK3a4hviKbNGswcZ5tZgZW. There are many ways to prove that this wallet is my deposit address on Binance, such as recording videos, taking screenshots of web pages, and the dozens of pages of chat history in the Binance chat app, which have multiple instances that can serve as proof. Nevertheless, I am very aware that these proofs are not strict on-chain verifications. Therefore, I am still actively communicating with the Binance wallet team to have them provide other more effective forms of proof

[@0x1686...4629](7KATdGaienjW2hCZcqNLE83MqTdp5M94sULzbWUMLrYCuB2L-hydradx) 

I'm going to have to deny this. I believe it probably is you. We just don't wan to run afoul of Binance. Make a future request with someone from Binance confirming that address is your address on Binance.

[@7PAU...Zqrk](7PAU47SuWQwTBwdLi42m1RyCKAvfSPhf5MaYqGExtKzoZqrk-hydradx) Agreed..Sorry but I am naying too for the same reason....

Voted AYE, for the reason that the user experience is not friendly enough to welcome major users, this event is not only the mistake from the user,  also as a Polkadot tech enthusiast, hoping the ecosystem grows stronger gradually, I really hope when in the future the application functionality grows more complex, most of the applications and chains are ready to serve crowd non tech users.

[@7Ncn...aAaT](7Ncn2umxqsBym8whkPJ5Ve9iL1aP6agHnVUPKgE5WirTaAaT-hydradx) Thank you for your support. To be honest, I am indeed a loyal fan of Polkadot. I first got involved as early as 2017 through an ICO, where I exchanged 10 ETH from a friend for 100 DOTs (which are now 10,000 DOTs). Although the DOT price has not been ideal, I have always been very confident in Polkadot and have continued to hold onto my DOTs, with my position growing over time. As for hydration.net, I only started using it a little over a month ago, and I must admit that there are indeed many misleading aspects to its interface, which I mentioned here: https://hydration.subsquare.io/posts/226. I believe that the issues I raised will continue to affect others if some interface improvements are not made. However, the main responsibility for this mistake still lies with me. I was too careless and did not perform small-scale tests before making large transfers, which has led to the considerable difficulties I am facing now.

![101.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmZo6mJ7kKuCqAntWESemLF7HaJigZB2n9aZwxxiMdPFe8)
![102.png](https://subsquare.infura-ipfs.io/ipfs/QmcLg9qmvKpsQu33HCFVZVXFAwoYoPR9DXGLUKczYGUfKD)

Here are the recent deposit and withdrawal records from my Binance account and my Polkadot Asset Hub address 16ZQnKNNbkLWDyq5zJqSJhAeJVeK3a4hviKbNGswcZ5tZgZW. These records can all serve as proof that the address 16ZQnKNNbkLWDyq5zJqSJhAeJVeK3a4hviKbNGswcZ5tZgZW belongs to my personal account.


[@0x1686...4629](7KATdGaienjW2hCZcqNLE83MqTdp5M94sULzbWUMLrYCuB2L-hydradx) 

Sorry, but changing HTML elements with the inspect element is very easy. For me this proves nothing.
There's no guarantee these screenshots show real data. I can do the same with addresses of my own.

We need an official Binance person to confirm all of this.

[@0x1686...4629](7KATdGaienjW2hCZcqNLE83MqTdp5M94sULzbWUMLrYCuB2L-hydradx) 

I believe you, but I need to hear someone I trust tell me Binance said they are okay with this and I will flip my vote. 

13cKp89Uh2yWgTG28JA1QEvPUMjEPKejqkjHKf9zqLiFKjH6 is an address given to me by Jose. I originally thought that I could directly transfer funds out from my deposit address 16ZQnKNNbkLWDyq5zJqSJhAeJVeK3a4hviKbNGswcZ5tZgZW through withdrawals, but after several tests, I found that when I withdraw from Binance, the transfer-out address is a hot wallet address of Binance. I have honestly reported this issue to Jose.

What is the cost of developing and supporting the Hydration network for the Binance exchange? Maybe it would make sense to hold a referendum on this issue? This would affect a larger number of Hydration network users.

You have my support. I read everything you wrote and hope you can get your funds back.

I am so sorry for the mistake that has resulted in having $12k temporarily locked up. Force transfer is something I find really hard to vote yes without a clear onchain permission given from the owner. I hope that hydration network is integrated soon to binance so they can help you further.

Following a possible way to give some "on chain" proof that binance agree or the owner agree with this referendum,

I asked him to withdraw this specific amount from the account  that have the 12k usdt but on AH to the sibling account of Hydration 

The amount specific is 1. 355049 , since the decimal convertion will be ( #21), can check this on https://b64encode.com/tools/text-to-decimal/

Doing some reference of agreement. If no is possible to do this, i finds very hard to pass this, since there is not way to have some correlation 

[@Jose Crypto](7NzNFJb2pfy2mZzdS2ky8okkXZL52fn2VAvAsc8jigvCtBec-hydradx) I fully understand that this is one of the necessary conditions, and I have no objection to your voting against. However, it is indeed frustrating and regrettable that the communication process with the Binance wallet team has been difficult and lengthy, and the efficiency has been extremely low. I will continue to work hard to communicate with the Binance wallet team in order to achieve this goal as soon as possible.

If you can get someone from Binance in touch with lolmshizz and he confirms I can support. 

`forceTransfer` is an extremely powerful tool that comes with significant implications.

Exchanges and large actors monitor how such tools are used. If they observe such interventions, they may view the network as less trustworthy.

**We need a clear confirmation & agreement with Binance in this case to make something like this happen.**

I urge everyone who voted `AYE` to reconsider their vote as this is not just about helping out a user.

[@Giraffe](7MdhKzwvPmvkNv1PQThTPMQLWrxBgKMqcwAJe6EEV2P9uNDv-hydradx) That's true. I think after users receive similar confirmations and agreements, everyone will strongly support them

Gave you my vote.  I believe this is a limitation on hydration/polkadot and I do believe this will cause future errors because users do not understand cross-chain.  I would say at least provide some note of cross-chain functionality and how it relates to sending to a CEX so this is not user friendly I agree.

[@0x9e88...13FA](7KATdGbBuRncvFsMJXEZhUaeZZjSpVbPTtjJNHDe1GyUqhAn-hydradx) there is already a note saying:

> **Sending any asset other than HDX to a centralized exchange will lead to a loss of funds. Instead, you should first send the asset to its source chain using cross-chain transfers.**

Right, but how is one to know the source chain when you are dealing with USDT?  This is the problem that it is not user friendly on Hydration/Polkadot and I can expect many more mistakes if people start using the lending/borrowing so I see this as a problem on the Hydration/Polkadot side and needs to be better introduced or fixed on the back-end so a regular user will not have to know this stuff.  This is not going to get people to use this application if it is not user-friendly and somebody this just cost $12000 for a mistake bound to happen many more times I believe.  This cross-chain stuff between parachains / Asset Hub is confusing even for the more experienced crypto folks.  

[@0x9e88...13FA](7KATdGbBuRncvFsMJXEZhUaeZZjSpVbPTtjJNHDe1GyUqhAn-hydradx) The thing is as the comment by parakeet or giraffe says

this would be a transfer of funds from an account that is under the supervision and ownership of binance

and making this transfer without the authorization of binance seems much more risky for the protocol in the future, since other protocols can simply say that those ownership rights will not be respected and not will accept nothing from us... sorry but this is crypto and we need some on chain proof  that they agree before of do something like this... if were only to help the user is other thing.... but you need to thing about the best for the protocol

This situation is unfortunate, but we can't prove this unless your proposal in the discussion thread and subsequently Jose's proposal here validates you are in control of this account by sending exact amount of tokens to selected address on AH.

Until then it's hard no. I will switch to abstain if you can prove the ownership on chain.

[@7MQz...wKQ1](7MQzCvHJHQUesZGubXN6uSkvZ8HMuVcFmCiMmH6UgY2iwKQ1-hydradx) 

I understand this but what happens when you have another 10, 20, or more cases like this come up?  Regular people do not know how cross-chain works and want to just use the protocol for their interests and I guess you will have the same explanation to them.  How is that good for the protocol?

[@0x9e88...13FA](7KATdGbBuRncvFsMJXEZhUaeZZjSpVbPTtjJNHDe1GyUqhAn-hydradx) To be clear, this was an user error. Ignoring UI warnings and not doing standard precautions such as sending test transaction when dealing with larger sums in a trustless blockchain can lead to loss of funds.

Nevertheless, we strive to improve UX as much as possible and that's why we're working on deposit and withdraw flows that will guide users through the process of onboarding and offboarding, while also adding additional checkbox to the UI when sending to non-owned address  so the people are forced to read the warning. 

I hope this will prevent users from doing something they shouldn't. However, we can't compromise the trustless and security part of the blockchain because of user mistakes.

I’m very sorry. Although I’ve had a tough week of communication with Binance, they still can’t provide me with any support. I’m really regretful and disappointed. I don’t know why Binance has become like this.

Please read [this discussion](https://hydration.subsquare.io/posts/226) for full context on this proposal.

If approved, this proposal will force transfer 12,000 USDT from 7P9y4pUmp5SJ4gKK3rFw6TvR24eqW7jVoyDs8LPunRYcHuzi to 7KATdGaienjW2hCZcqNLE83MqTdp5M94sULzbWUMLrYCuB2L

source

dest

currencyId

amount

Rejected

Submitted

DecisionStarted

DecisionDepositPlaced

root

Request to retrieve 12,000 USDT mistakenly deposited into Binance

whitelisted_caller

referendum_canceller

referendum_killer

general_admin

treasurer

spender

tipper

omnipool_admin

economic_parameters

Origin able to dispatch a whitelisted call.

 Origin for spending very high amounts of HDX(<= 50M HDX) from the treasury as well as generally administering it.

Origin able to spend up to 2,222,222 HDX from the treasury at once.

Origin able to spend up to 50K HDX from the treasury at once.

Origin able to perform specific Omnipool-related actions.