keht

trying to please everyone

[keht @kehtfi]

@0xOmnia DMed

[keht @kehtfi]

@hyperanar Still, those traders could be generating real returns instead of draining your house 😄 Great!

[keht @kehtfi]

@cryppimagic @jtx_trade @perpdexlist Co-Authored-By: Claude [email protected]

[keht @kehtfi]

@BasedOneX Are you sure this is the one?

[keht @kehtfi]

name one reason the devs think this is acceptable

[keht @kehtfi]

@hypurrdash @imperator_co @hyperpc_ @hypeglobal_ 😮 Wow. Congrats! Looking forward to seeing what’s next

[keht @kehtfi]

It’s not about FTMO. Whoever holds the money and also decides who’s “valid” will eventually use both against you

[XAIN @xainfx_]

I successfully passed both Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the FTMO Challenge and was approved for a funded account.

During the KYC process, I realized FTMO required a passport instead of my national ID. Since I didn’t have one, I paid extra to obtain my passport urgently so I could complete the verification as quickly as possible.

I submitted my KYC, and it was approved. Naturally, I believed everything was in order and continued trading.

However, when I requested my $4,000 payout, I received an email stating that they had found “discrepancies” in my KYC. They did not explain what those discrepancies were, rejected my payout, and permanently banned my account.

What I don’t understand is this:

* If there was a discrepancy in my KYC, why was it approved in the first place?
* Why was I only informed after requesting my payout?
* Why wasn’t I given any opportunity to clarify or correct the alleged issue?
* Why wasn’t the exact discrepancy disclosed?

Approving someone’s KYC, allowing them to continue, and then raising unexplained verification issues only when it’s time to pay them creates serious concerns about transparency and fairness.

I’m not asking for special treatment. I’m simply asking FTMO to clearly explain what the alleged discrepancy is and why it wasn’t identified before my account was approved.

I hope FTMO addresses this matter professionally and provides a transparent explanation for rejecting my $4,000 payout.

@FTMO_com
@propfirmeye
@PropFirmMedia
@Limitless_Noman
@propfirmsplaza
@ohajielom

[keht @kehtfi]

@SamuelDrnda Appreciate it. Still building

[keht @kehtfi]

@MartinHo99999 No crying in the casino. If you still want to trade, don’t gamble your own money — try funded accounts instead

[keht @kehtfi]

Fell for all those DeepSeek benchmark screenshots and plugged it in as a Loki / Grafana metrics analyst for @proportion_fi via OpenClaw.

Result: 3/3 alert analyses were wrong 💀

[keht @kehtfi]

Turns out giving away free funded accounts is a bad idea. Especially to crypto people 🫠

[keht @kehtfi]

@vgharshul @ProprXYZ on-chain tx from your own wallet proves nothing. trader payout? payroll? marketing? affiliate? all looks the same

[keht @kehtfi]

It seems like a bunch of prop firms are starting up these days. They all have this marketing thing centered on Hyperliquid, you know. I think there are going to be way more of them soon enough. But anyway, we are working on something that is not like the rest
Proportion

[ProportionFI @proportion_fi]

1/5
An on-chain prop firm cannot just be a Web2 prop desk with a wallet attached.
It has to be non-custodial, verifiable, transparent, and composable.

Rules, capital, risk, and settlement should live in the protocol.

[keht @kehtfi]

@X3NOZEDIT @BlueberryFunded @PropFirmMatch Sorry to hear. They always find something. We're just starting out can give you a small balance to trade if you're interested

[keht @kehtfi]

@MrButlerhl @Markets_xyz @0xOmnia @topdog_perp Hey, we also use HL builder codes can spot you a balance to trade if you want to try it

[keht @kehtfi]

@Geedow_ "Layering violation" = "we found a reason." Every prop firm keeps 2-3 of these in the back pocket for payout day. The whole industry runs on that asymmetry.

[keht @kehtfi]

@risers343 Classic. Literally every other prop firm