[A Modest Proposal] Burn the LUNA of every LUNA holder who wants to abandon UST

Governance & Proposals
41

The hide to say:

“I am not a thief. I am not a scammer.”

and

“do not steal other people’s money”

In the same proposal where you suggest that another’s fungible token should be burned and arbitrarily have no value because they do not agree with your opinion.

I suggest you come down from your moral high-horse and take a good hard look at yourself.

I also request others to heart my modest reply, share it on social media, and question the basic ethics and morality of this proposal.

Yours sincerely,
Long time LUNA hodler who never gets involved with stablecoins …and if you want to know why I dislike stablecoins, (1) I’m not a trader, I HODL. If I wanted USD $1, I’d just use USD fiat (2) Check out the disaster story of this stablecoin I heard about, it’s called UST.

1 Like
42

I suggest that you learn to read, and familiarize yourself with the concept of satire.

That being said, I’m dead serious when I say that anyone who wants to abandon UST holders to pump LUNA is a bad person: A thief, and a scammer.

You contradict yourself. LUNA holders invested in a stablecoin ecosystem. You provided the collateral backing a stablecoin. You were assuredly involved in stablecoins!

Some of us are in this because we believe in decentralized, permissionless money. I have sometimes held most of my dollars in UST, simply to avoid centralized systems. I missed the de-peg by sheer luck; it could have financially ruined me.

43

Let’s work backwards…

Some of us are in this because we believe in decentralized, permissionless money .

That’s me, bro. That’s why the Bitcoin network is here. I don’t want decentralised, permissionless money …in the denomination of a particular country’s government fiat currency.

You were assuredly involved in stablecoins!

No I wasn’t. I invested in a highly speculative asset, LUNA, in a nascent industry that’s price was subject to the forces of supply and demand on a variety of exchanges. I invested more when I learnt about the large number of projects within the ecosystem and the growing community of developers & non-developers.

That being said, I’m dead serious when I say that anyone who wants to abandon UST holders to pump LUNA

Here you misrepresent my position. (1) I don’t want to abandon to UST, the market already has. It’s dead, time to move on. Even if the peg can be restored in the long run, then market confidence in it’s ability to maintain the peg is likely forever gone (akin to many currencies forced out of their pegs over the past 50-60 years). (2) I don’t want to pump LUNA, I want steady long-term sustainable growth of the ecosystem. I want the ecosystem and community to drive the utility of the token, which in turn will increase demand and save the LUNA hodlers from the disaster caused by UST …And finally to conflate these two issues as some sort of zero sum game that I wish to enforce is simply disingenuous. I have zero care for UST, just as have zero care for any stablecoin pegged to fiat currency. My care is exclusively for LUNA, and as an investor in this token & now a participant in its governance discussion, I am 100% entitled to care about my investment. I wish no harm to UST hodlers, they just don’t factor into my investment decision into LUNA and my desire to recoup my monies lost by a flawed UST blowing the thing up.

I suggest that you learn to read, and familiarize yourself with the concept of satire.

That’s just rude and inappropriate. And don’t try the ol’ “I was just joking! It’s satire!” trick. I’ve seen a few of your posts tonight and you speak with all the arrogant authority of a 2nd year economics student or 2nd year associate. Your content has impact. You call for drastic actions. You write in large chunks of prose, even calling original proposals …And then you claim a satire defence? Give me a break.

Final new addition:

  • UST is dead.

  • No only is UST dead, but this stablecoin will go down in the history books alongside the Mt Gox affair, the DAO attack, and other blockchain disasters that will never be forgotten and end up setting this industry back years.

  • The sooner this cancer is cut out from my LUNA investment, the better.

Yours sincerely,
Someone who won’t reply to this thread anymore. Neither of us are changing each other’s minds. So I leave the floor to you to convince others why I’m wrong :slight_smile:

44

The link to the Wikipedia page for Swift’s A Modest Proposal is in the unedited OP here. It was clearly my intention from the start.

I hope so. And that impact is not assisted by pointless back-and-forth arguments with people who don’t read, so I will here summarize briefly: I didn’t misrepresent your position—you ripped one sentence of my post out of context, and twisted it to say that I misrepresented your position. And I am a Bitcoiner first and foremost.

I used UST because it’s sometimes a practical necessity to deal with dollars. On principle, I want a decentralized, permissionless way to handle dollars without banks. A permissionless fiat-pegged currency is strictly the lesser ill, compared to dollars in the bank. It is incongruous to say, “Buy BTC to Be Your Own Bank, but keep your dollars in the bank.”

And if you bought LUNA, you bought into the concept of decentralised, permissionless money in the denomination of a particular country’s government fiat currency. It was the stated purpose of the Terra Network all along. It is the nature of your LUNA investment, and exactly what you were supporting.