Proposal to open the Bridge between BSC and Mainnet Odin again

Proposal Overview

This proposal recommends opening up again the BSC to Odin bridge.
The new bridge period should be clearly defined (like one month, one week) and clearly communicated via project’s social media.

Eligible tokens to migrated: the tokens must have been bought before the liquidity was pulled (April 21, 2022, at 18:00 CET) on BSC;

Background and Rationale

Initially, the Bridge was open up until April 21, 2022, at 18:00 CET.
There are some investors that bought in the initial stages of the project and missed the announcements and deadlines to bridge their tokens. As a gesture of good will, they will get another window to move their assets into Odin MainNet.

No poll for now, we need to get the views of each side for now.


Hi Team Odin. It would be great to see this option to migrate from BSc open up. I invested on day one. Thought it looked like an interesting project and the team looked credible so I took a risk on it. I’m a casual investor as I expect many are. I rarely look at Telegram etc just intending things to grow over years. Certainly wasn’t expecting to lose my coins because of a migration. Understand that some people’s perspective might be that people like me should have kept a close eye on it and we shouldn’t invest if we don’t expect this kind of thing but not everyone is so deep in to this stuff. We are just silent investors. Anyway, would be great if you can sort this. My investment is way less than half what I put in but I would leave it in to grow over the long term. Thanks. Dan


In my opinion this is a bad idea because it would create unnecessary work for the Odin Protocol team and the Odin Mainnet.

Reopening the bridge would require the team to allocate time and resources that could be better spent on developing and improving the Odin Mainnet and its features. Moreover, it would create unfairness and resentment among the users who migrated their tokens on time and followed the rules. They would see their tokens diluted by the influx of new tokens from the BSC network.
Therefore, there is no valid reason to reopen the bridge and allow latecomers to migrate their tokens.

The Odin Protocol team should focus on the future of the project and not on the past mistakes of some investors.


The bridge still exists and it’s still accessible if you still know the URL. It’s true. Since the approval process is semi-manual and it still needs to be validated by buy date, and will take some time. But organized well it can minimize the amount of work involved, eg:

  • the bridge is opened for a month;
  • the approval process is happening once a week, no exceptions (if you bridge in the second day after the approval, you will wait 6 days until you have them in your wallet).

It’s something that I said a lot in the Telegram channel. These people used real money. These people might have suffered from burn cycle we initially had (so they would have lost 4-12% per transactions). There are lots of valid reasons not to be able to monitor the change. I don’t even think there would be so many.

Then again, they had no time to follow this project for the last 2 years, but after the price increase the last 2 weeks, they all show up. To me, that makes it look like they just didn’t care for 2 years, they couldn’t be bothered for that price, but they did follow the project.

1 Like

You say we didn’t “follow the rules” but no one said there were rules (rules that say the tokens may become inaccessible) when we invested on day one. No one said we had to monitor this. Just invest in a project that over time will make money. Now (completely understandably) we come back, when all crypto is pumping so obviously everyone is having another look. To me it seems very unfair that we invest in something that is SUPPOSED to be long term, then when we leave it long term we are told something changed that means we can not access it.



I will vote yes. There are valid points for and against this proposal but in my opinion only voting “yes” would resolve it forever.

“No” would mean more bickering about this topic, more questions about migration and community shouldn’t exhaust and divide itself in this kind of fights.

Thanks for reading and setting this topic.

I vote yes.

Back in the day I invested in dozens of projects. During bear, I lost interest to follow the news each one of them. It just took too much time.

I would lose significant amount of tokens if the community votes no. From experience I can tell, that the projects showing good will have been the most successful ones, because that creates trust.

Already commented a couple of times but to be clear (in case this is the actual vote) I vote yes:. It’s not a crime to lose track of a crypto investment in a bear market and changing the platform was never originally stated as far as I’m aware.

I vote ‘Yes’.

It’s just unfair to let down on investors whom have invested from day one. Lots of people didn’t keep track of investment during the bear market and it’s not a sin.

It’s on wise for the dev. To reconsider her community and grant this gesture.

Thank you.

I am also in favour of voting YES as long it doesn’t take away time that can be spent on developing other important things. I also don’t think its a priority and it should only be opened when the team are able to do it.

The bridge should only open for a month and at the end, a date should be set when the tokens will be transferred. Its also important that the team don’t have a deadline for completing the migration for each wallet, as the they have to manually check each transaction.

My biggest concern is people who will try migrating invalid tokens and waste precious time.

I vote YES!
In any case, the bridge should be reopened, ideally for a longer period of time, as many people certainly don’t know that something like this happened. For someone like me with hundreds of different tokens, it’s difficult to keep up with every token. Since we have also invested, it is also fair that this investment does not go to waste. Thanks!

I vote ‘Yes’

I invested into this project because I trusted the project when it came up. Unfortunately things didn’t work out accompanied by the bear market. It’s unfortunate I couldn’t keep up with most of the updates, not just this project but lot of others.

It’s only fare to let us the investors whom had trusted you so much from the beginning to reclaim our funds and swap together with the rest of the community.

Thank you for the reconsideration.

1 Like

Ok. The sentiment seems to be positive about this. We will wait to see if other investors are having other points of view. If not, we can move this into a on-chain proposal.

If you are seeing other peers requesting this, send them here to make their point instead of asking about updates about opening the bridge.

1 Like

Please excuse my ignorance. If the vote is an “on chain proposal” does that mean the only people voting will be people who don’t have any tokens remaining in the bsc chain? Surely that means the people who this vote affects will be excluded from voting and would mean a biased poll. Sorry if I’ve misunderstood.

That’s my concern too.

This is exactly the case.
If you are unfamiliar with governance within Cosmos projects (and most of the DAO enabled projects that supports governance), the actual voting takes place on-chain.

See past proposals for Odin here: ODIN Mainnet proposals

Additionally, the proposal will need a fee before getting submitted on-chain, something like 1000 Odin if I’m correct. I am willing to provide 20% of this fee myself. But if the team will not use their funds to submit it and the community will not join interest to pay the fee, it won’t reach on-chain.

What you need to know is that anyone can submit a proposal on-chain. They would need an active odin node (instructions here) and a wallet to provide the fees for the proposal.

Osmosis has a very good article on what on-chain governance would look lilke: Governance

I think everyone who didn’t migrate in time deserves a second chance, especially since everything happened when the entire crypto market was down. Only a few had motivation to stay active, not me :cry:

1 Like

Ok that makes it a bit clearer. I have a feeling that the people responding here, including me, are people who are not on the Osmosis set up, and are just plain old investors with old bsc tokens. I don’t have Linux or the technical ability to submit the proposal. It would be a genuinely amazing show of good will if someone on the Osmosis came up with the remaining 800 ODINS to propose it when there is nothing in it for them (I expect the people who want this to go ahead have all their tokens in bsc but hopefully I’m wrong). I would give 20% too maybe even 40% but my tokens are in bsc. Thanks.

Just to be clear. I don’t have any liquid Odin. Everything I have is staked and will be for a long time. For my share of this proposal (an probably even more) I will buy out with my funds from Osmosis just because I believe in having the bridge open again I a advocated for it.