We are similar because we forked the same source. And you will find even more similarities because we’re both DEX. There is nothing wrong with forking and we openly admitted it. But please do not accuse us to be MMF Devs.
Stop your confirmation bias. Why don’t you look at the new Vault we’re working on?
lol 
The allegations were that we are similar, similar = MMF Team, yes we forked from the same source. But no, we’re not MMF Devs. @scam_detector He can even say we’re both from Pancake. Since we’re similar as well.
Any allegations made on MMF Team does not apply to us.
You claim to not be the devs, but can not provide any evidence to support that including detailing a single other project you have worked on.
Governance shouldn’t touch this with 10 foot pole.
Who are the team behind ZZF?
And since you were once investors on MMF, don’t you think coming up with a new project (ZZF) which is forking MMF( or whichever project you forked that MMF also forked) could make people think you are same?
Like mentioned, we are a new team. No previous project.
If I revert the question back to you, how do you proof I am MMF Team? Just because we forked something anyone could? All those who forked pancake & uniswap, who are they?
The similarities are too striking.
Best case scenario, your only credential is being investors in a scam project with no dev experience.
Worst case scenario, you are the same team which is why everything down to your bots is the same.
Either way, a grant would be a mistake and it is so disappointing that this was labeled a “good proposal” twice by a delegate and DeFi Committee member when it is clear you all left the previous projects portion out for a reason.
We need more due diligence.
I created this account so that I can comment on this thread, and share my thoughts.
Other than some observations/evidence made by other members, ie same bot message etc, I would like to add on a few of mine.
And lastly, if you hate MMF so much, why are you ‘attacking’ them so just so you can import their users over? Any decent project will attract users by virtue of good development and communication.
Basically this ZZ Finance just feels like the MMF team wanting to start all over and are doing some sort of ‘out of the box’ marketing to attract their current community over under the pretense of ‘starting afresh and build our own community and help MMF investors’
Happy to hear from Luthor on my pointers
We will consolidate all that is written here and come back with a proposed solution.
In the meantime, I’d kindly ask to stop fudding base on pure assumptions. It’s not helpful to anyone, and puts you in a bad light too.
Thank you.
It doesn’t make any sense to argue about whether to fork or not. If it is, ZZF also forks pancake. Maybe we can compare the similarities between MMF and Pancake, including MMF Docs.
I’m just an ordinary defi user. What I care about is not fork, but the sustainability of the project. 
This is also the opinion of most of our users.
Another account created on the same day as the others who have who have exclusively commented on this proposal. You are only reinforcing the perception that there is something off here.
I know Optimism because of MMF and ZZF, maybe I’m a novice
Skepticism from other member on this thread is valid and I think it wont be possible to really confirm if you are the same team or not as MMF team were not doxxed.
I would suggest, go though all the feedback you have got so far and address them in the proposal.
Update your document with team member detail :- The Team - Zealous Zombie Finance, if more than one team member is willing to KYC that would be give some confidence in zzf.
Most important, focus on your launch next week on Optimism and keep any eye on the proposal.
That “Scam_detector” account was created today just for accusing the ZZF project…
Yes, however their claims are verifiable and persuasive to existing community members.
Every account in here arguing otherwise was created around the same time and have just been commenting in this one single project. As I’ve said, it is only making this seem more likely to be scam.
I would suggest they stop and let the proposers argue their case, lest they do more damage than has already been done.
