A Proposal For Members of The Luna Classic Community

Continuing the discussion from Governance Voting : LUNC Community VOTING for Governance:

Here: LUNC To $1? How Terra Can Be Re-Engineered | by Daniel Mark Harrison | May, 2022 | Medium


I read your proposal. I am not going to pretend to be smart enough to understand it’s inticate calculation details but thank you for your work and effort hopefully somebody far smarter than me reads it too :slight_smile:

1 Like

Interesting ideas. A currency coin without a peg.

I might have missed it, but I don’t see what would be driving merchants adoption though, why would they go through the bother of dealing with a floating currency when they could have usd instead ?

In any case, priority should be to reopen governance so that proposals could have healthy discussions


Its a good question and the answer is for same reason some merchants like opening up stores in an overseas country: - new market, foreign currency income that can when translated into their host currency yield additional gains etc. A stablecoin without a peg makes most sense, yes. That’s what merchant’s use now everywhere

Hello @Daniel_Mark_Harrison, I’d like to add @FatMan as he has a wider community access.

How do you (or can you) currently access TerraV1 related assets?
How do you (or can you) currently access TerraV1 governance proposals?

Is there a discord with wide audience where we can discuss about TerraV1?


1 Like

Hi there - sounds great, thanks. I have Terra Station (still V1 is it, I haven’t checked in all honesty).

A bit of badkground may help you out here as I can see what you’re asking, just some relative info on the guy. I developed the first DeFi protocol called Synthchain. Here’s the WP’ SYNTHCHAIN WP #2 (05/2019) (pdf) . Also co founded Zurcoin one of the first POW chains deployed in 2013: Wp1 is here: http://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/376ea1a4-c54c-4791-bcf6-d32c19a50c15/downloads/ZUR-1.pdf?ver=1630174905294 and WP2 is here: http://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/376ea1a4-c54c-4791-bcf6-d32c19a50c15/downloads/ZUR-2.pdf?ver=1630174905294. I have also co developed other Blockchain protocol spin offs such as Volttechain: http://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/376ea1a4-c54c-4791-bcf6-d32c19a50c15/downloads/WP-Voltechain-FINAL.pdf?ver=1630174905294 as well as market making dapps like PIMMS: http://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/376ea1a4-c54c-4791-bcf6-d32c19a50c15/downloads/BITZUR-WP-1-PIMMS.pdf?ver=1630174905293

I was the first markets writer for CoinDesk in 2014 and the editor in chief of Coinspeaker from 2015-17. A video here: The Age of Factory Banking: What's A Bitcoin Worth? (Mekler Media Conference HK, 2015) - YouTube

So I am okay knowing my way around this texh however I am an architectuee guy and NOT a programmer so you would need builders if. I was to be of any help to you guys.

Thanks for getting in touch - coin still has tons of potential. I don’t think people realiae how much


Daniel Mark Harrison

I appreciate the amount of work you put into this, however I think the result would not be a solid rescue plan. To link LUNC and UST in the way would describe would very likely end up with both being less than a penny perpetually.

Remember that the trillions minted in a very short time is how we got here. Assuming that there would be a price increase at some point, the very same type selling could occur in a rapidly declining market.

IMHO, any discussion of a UST restoration needs to decouple any algorithmic link from LUNC to UST and propose a real world reserves, with a Goal of getting back to a stable price point, ie $1.

This makes more sense to use the new community with developers and validators agreeing to use a portion of commission supporting a burn over time and working with exchanges to share a portion of fees till basic benchmarks are reached. For example, any new validators approved for LUNC would have to agree that they burn into a verifiable wallet say 40% of all commission revenue.

With this also related to UST, that burn would continue till equilibrium is reached. As new UST is minted, those funds would go into a reserve acct managed by a 3rd party (someone like a Prime Trust) so there is no temptation by anyone to use that money for another purpose or risk that money in another crypto which could likely drop similarly in a market decline. Any profit generated at that point would in turn be used to burn more LUNC consistently.

I do applaud your seeking a solution, but the worry as I said would be that we would again end up where we are now.


I disagree with you and I will outline why on another post as the misconceptions your thinking elicits are ones that many others have too when it comes to cryptocurencies and are perfectly normal if you come from mostly a tech or mostly a traditional financial markets background. Cryptos work a little bit differently as they are inherently non-value assets (the first NVAs in the world actually) and so many of the fears you have are not likely to be present UNLESS you try and PEG the NVA to a sovereign or some other kind of price. The problem we just saw was simply because everyone minted without disincentive. If you study my proposal carefully there’s tremendous disincentive to stop minting more coins at a certain point as the TX burn is more like a bonfire!

1 Like

Why can’t the LUNC be pegged to another stable coin? I have contacts to one which is based upon sovereignty… who do I forum this with… @Fatman?


Name one pegged coin in history that has worked (and don’t say HKD, it’s falling apart).

Why do you want a leg anyway? Many banks handle crypto and fiat now …I don’t see why you’d take the risk of holding max 1 USD for the same risk it may be worth 1 USD max tomorrow or min 0 USD.

The Luna WP actually focuses on making a spendable algocoin derived of a basket of foreign xe (way better idea and he should have stuck with that) …this USTC thing was a horrible idea loaded with risk and hyped with certain value attributes that I guess sone of the guys found massively lucrative in terms of volume arb. Prob is that volume was actually manifest in piles of hidden risk . Every single peg coin in history both in fiat and digital is the same too

1 Like

Mark, reply with your Skype and I’ll send you over the details… The stable coin is underpinned by sovereignty, which removed the risk of volatility…

1 Like

I didn’t read, but will add that GYEN has a floating peg. The coin fluctuates like a hybrid, but is supposed to mirror the Yen. There is a lot of info on it, and had mixed reactions and a few issues on Coinbase. GYEN - The Stablecoin for JPY

My thoughts are to create a hybrid backed by gold, e.g. PAXG, but before anything governance needs to be fixed.

1 Like

Hi, I discovered this proposal on Medium. And I like it! The only point where I am a pessimist is the adoption by merchants. But maybe the community can adopt it in a resell goods of second hands using the ust like the gune in France or the experience they’ve made with Pi. If the community valorizes the ust to 1 dollars, we can slowly arrive at a repeg.

1 Like

Well, that’s interesting but I am not so sure I would bank on sovereignty being that stable in this day and age …

Pegging to stable coin based upon sovereignty, rather than pure algorithm would definitely see growth… Ucadia have created a stable coin, which is based upon a sovereignty created over decades of research and work… I just need a contact within the terra community who we can forum this proposal with… Of course there is more that is required to reduce the token number and develop further utilities, however a structured model could be generated…


True. That actually could work now you put it that way. But it’s not anything I know about. Maybe out a competing proposal together and post up here?

1 Like

The most important task at hand is to get governance back up and running. Problem is validators are acting like they are blind.


I’ve contacted Ucadia directly and I’ll get back to you once I’ve received feedback…

1 Like

Sounds great. Please ask them to be serious about what they pay as an advance. I don’t work for free.

I’m new here, but I find this proposal extremely interesting. The whole crash triggered my interest, and after studying available materials, I realized that there is a mathematical description possible. UST/LUNA was chaotic from the get go…

Next week I’ll try to capture the proposal in a set of coupled differential equations. The idea is this: this set of equations capturing the proposal shouldn’t allow for chaotic behavior. This would allow for a controllable USTC/LUNAC pair…

Again, I’m new here, but I feel that the commitment of many members here should be awarded. It’ll cost some effort, and I hope I can contribute in this way.