ACTUAL SOLUTION! to burning mechanisms, with a source code and white paper

Governance & Proposals
1

I hope I am not late. The only way this proposal is not going to work is if we constantly print and inflate Luna. What I am proposing are the solutions to following:

  • Burning initiative (you have to purchase Luna to burn Luna)
  • The amount of free-floating Luna on the market
  • Inflated Luna
  • Price manipulation
  • Block-chain coins may be a securities issue
  • Letting the investors get rich in respect to Luna (no, there is nothing wrong in getting rich!)

The white-paper and the source-code (Ethereum token) are located here:
github DOT com/olejardamir/Hertz

How does it work?

  • There is a fee to locking (or in this case wrapping) Luna
  • The fee is split onto % that is burned and % that is shared with others who locked Luna
  • Locked Luna gives you another coin that simply states how much of the shared locked Luna you have
  • You can never get more coins for the same or lesser amount of Luna that you previously locked
  • You can never get less Luna by unlocking than what you locked (except by applying the fees)
  • You can create an arbitrage of the Locked Luna coins on the exchange and exchange back on the Luna chain (or do the reverse)

This is my old reddit post I made several days ago:
reddit DOT com/r/terraluna/comments/usu7v0/here_is_a_luna_solution_that_nobody_has_considered/

Mechanism WORKS, and is a valid solution to a current problem. It goes along any burning mechanism that you propose, and it gives people a reason to purchase and burn Luna!

About me: I am a full-stack full-time developer, and I can work on making this mechanism. The only thing I need is a community support, a few brilliant minds on my side to think of an improved mechanism, a team of people who are interested in purchasing Luna, doing the work/coding… and of course, the possibility of getting rich by making others get rich - the honest way.

PS This pegging idea can go beyond the Luna, and can become a working and a functioning decentralized company (a dream of every entrepreneur).

15 Likes
2

First of all, supporters of LUNA Classic need to get governance rights. We should issue NFTs with governance rights. Bidding on NFTs requires LUNA Classic. The auction proceeds will be used for burning! In this way, holders of a large number of LUNA classics will definitely bid for NFT
NFTs with governance rights can be listed on major NFT platforms such as OpenSea, which allows more advanced players to participate.
Then the community starts the burning journey of LUNA classics. The goal is to bring LUNA back to its peak. Our community is strong enough to PK with DOGE SHIB.

6 Likes
3

You have my support. I think we can work with what you proposed. Need to think about this mechanism.

5 Likes
4

There are many barriers that need to be cleared.

Step 1. The MOST important piece to everything is the allowance of the Terra Community [As a whole], to delegate, and take part of the voting process. As many of the proposals by DK, and the inner circle only enrichen themselves at the expense of others. [IMO, more of a power grab vs money.]

There is nothing preventing dev, builders, and validators to purchase Terra products at fire-sale liquidation prices, and reaping the rewards when the system reboots.

Most of them have staking rewards stuck too! Where do you think these rewards are going to be sold? Right now, they are earning like 37000% so of course they will leverage the liquidity of CEXs, and duump them on retail.

Step 2. Is the expression of decoupling UST from LUNA. Right now, from my review of posts on this forum, MINTING is still enabled. This means when LUNA/UST functions resume, [I refer to the other only as V2.] that the MINTING function will again print trillions of LUNA to defend the peg. [It’s a Chernobyl event.]

There are also probably hundreds of millions of UST/LUNA trapped in various pools, wallets, chains, CEXs, and the list goes on. So the system needs a burn solution in place when the switch is turned back on.

LUNA can burn, and UST can be back-stopped by the remaining assets of the LFG. It probably would be the only way to be fair to everyone.

Thank you,
JS

3 Likes
5

https://twitter.com/stablekwon/status/1528009627161403392?s=19 check this tweet guys reply withy your proposal please

1 Like
6

Strike the iron while it’s hot and help sign the petition Change.org VC compensation petition

2 Likes
7

Bump and make a proposal on statio

1 Like
8

Do Kwon said no minting a few hours ago. And he will compensate Ust victims by direct funding. So ust wont be pegged anymore

1 Like
9

Sorry guys, could not reply before the 4hr timeout.

@minlong_sun that would be a different solution. Also, I am not a fan of the NFT fad.

@MagicalTux There are two ways this can be done. On Luna chain, and off Luna chain. The first solution can work if the Luna is coded to allow such a mechanism. The second solution may not work. The problem is, I do not know how to lock and unlock Luna unless using a centralized and closed-source code approach. If it can be done with a wrapper, then it would be a better approach, since it could help other coins too. Otherwise, too much FUD will happen and it will be hard to lift the project off the ground. I am open to learning new things…

@Joe_Smith lets see what happens, and if minting is allowed after that, the solution I am proposing will not work.

@Issy_Issy Thanks, I will take a look and see if appropriate to reply on Twitter.

@TerraNova Thanks for the link and taking interest in the proposal.

@ChoboDrone I am very new here, how do I make a proposal on statio?

@Inanc_yanik I hope you are right, fingers crossed!

1 Like
10

Can’t really wait and see what happens. Time is of the essence here.

De-coupling LUNA/UST has already been agreed upon in spirit by a majority, and I even believe DK agreed. We just need to make sure the MINTING mechanism is 100% terminated. No chance of flooding the market again with minted LUNA.

We [community] need to fix staking/delegation. We need to be able to delegate during emergency staking halts; otherwise, none of new and old can delegate our vote. [Community already entrusts the validators, so I do not see issue here.]

Then, we can cross the bridge of reducing supply and bootstrapping solutions.

JS

3 Likes
12

Very interesting, could work…

1 Like
13

Great to have some people with the passion and most importantly the know how of how to implement a solution.
You need to publicise this, get people in the community on board and that will help stoke trading volume especially if it can be seen how this will reduce and get rid of tokens.
Need a realistic time line, which accounts for intial decreased sales volume… we will peak in the next few days i expect.
Lunatics will need to feel they are on course to regain there money, and then trust and confidence will return.
Nothing wrong with you getting rich in the process, everyone on here either wants to maintain or increase their wealth. Good luck…

3 Likes
14

It is the mathematical equivalent of a perpetual motion machine.

These types of contracts have been around for a long time. There is even research into automated detection. I know that I’ve seen one somewhere with almost exactly the mechanism you describe on your Github, but I can’t find the link right now.

How does it work ?

The explanation is very simple. Imagine people putting money on one pile. Each time someone wants to take the money back or send it to someone else, they have to leave 2% of that amount on the pile. The 2% that remain on a pile are shared with everyone since the Hertz token simply tells how much of a pile you own rather than how much of money you got. Therefore, nobody can lose more than 2% of what they put on a pile, while everyone profits together from the money-flow. This is how we can have a deflationary stable-coin where nobody loses and where everyone always gains.

You can’t fool the market. Guaranteed returns (including guaranteed stability without a backing reserve that can lose money) are impossible.

(My evaluation is based on your GH README as quoted above, not the forum post description which seemed unclear to me. Your README also misinterprets Bitcoin’s deflationary economics, but that’s off-topic here.)

2 Likes
15

This should be proposed after 27 may for Luna Classic

1 Like
16

You are welcome to try the source code on the Ethereum testnet. Nobody is proposing fooling the market. You may find similarities with the P0nzi schemes, but there is no fr@ud involved. You can always get exact amount of Luna that you input, assuming the burning and sharing fees. You are told what the fees are, and you are told the minimum amount you can get back. WHERE IS THE FR@UD IN THAT??? By the way, this is also how banks and exchanges work stuffing their pockets, while nothing is given to a community, which is far worse than what I am proposing. Also, where exactly am I misinterpreting Bitcoin deflationary economics and from what text and how did you conclude that ??? FYI you can mine tokens using a freaking stop-watch as blocks are already mined for you on Ethereum chain (assuming no proof of stake)… but like you said, that is off-topic, as not sure if you deserved my time, especially when topic is in a slow mode. If you don’t get it, that is YOUR problem and not mine.

I would LOVE to see this exactly the same mechanism that you somehow are aware of but cannot find, while pointing to P0nzi schemes.

I would gladly defend this idea I am proposing, and honestly you, and others alike, will have to do a better job than just saying things, attacking, and pointing to things that are not directly related.

I am using this tone, on purpose, because I am not convinced that proposal is a fr@ud, that it is trying to cheat the market, and that it will or can fail. You are free to provide better arguments at any time, and I will change the tone.

Awaiting your next move, hopefully it will contain something useful rather than disrespectful…

3 Likes
17

@D_O, The idea looks promising. Can you create a visual diagram of this system so that everyone understands better? Then we can put it up there for official voting.

2 Likes
18

Can you create a visual diagram

Sure, I can look into it today. I am glad to be of assistance.
The part that everyone is confused with is that the price does not go down, and that you cannot run away with the money leaving others damaged.

Will reply with a diagram, a short URL to draw.io

1 Like
21

The idea looks promising. Can you create a visual diagram of this system so that everyone understands better? Then we can put it up there for official voting.

Topic is in a slow mode, and I hate it!

Anyway, here you go, it was very simple, but I had to wait 4 hrs (wtf moderators!)
I have created a diagrams for the Hertz Token and Luna proposal.
Placed it on Github for an ease of access.

Hertz:
ClassDiagram.svg
Hertz Workflow.png

Luna:
Luna Proposal Workflow.png

If you want to change/edit the diagram, go to draw.io and load this file:
Luna Proposal Workflow.drawio

Note, Lets call the second coin Coin-X (so it is not confused with Luna)

Basically, you start with some price, lets say 1:1 ratio. Then, you burn the supply of the Coin-X and calculate how much Luna you get in return based on the supply of Coin-X. This is how the price always goes up, because, you are always burning the supply of the Coin-X pegged to Luna. This is also how you cannot cheat and manipulate the price other than by making it go up.

I hope it makes sense now. Should you make any public proposal, feel free to ask me to double-check.
The thing to note is that wrappers and exchanges flipping numbers will not deflate/burn the coin when transfers are made.
Some exchanges DO NOT ALLOW the burning fee on a transfer, so the best thing to do is NOT to burn on transfer.

Therefore, we should find the best percentage (marked as x,y,z,a % in diagram) that would make the coin price rise.
We can emulate the random behaviour of several hundred or thousands users to find the best percents.

We also should consider the possibility of a deadlock situation and a stall if the percentages are not aligned properly - it becomes unprofitable to do the swap according to trades/prices/fees on exchanges, so the swap is never made). Making a dynamic % burn according to price would be too complicated in my opinion… So the question is, does it stall, and are there % numbers when it cannot stall ?

All of this is just an idea, so it can be adjusted or changed.
For example, after certain time, we can renew the supply to the same number as we started but with a different the price ratio so we can continue burning… Because, if someone purchases most of coins and simply loses the account password, we cannot burn those.

Anyway, lets work on a full proposal, so I can fill in with the DOs and DON’Ts, attacks, solutions… I just don’t know how to communicate effectively with this 4hr mode.

2 Likes
22

I suggest you do a simulation. Create say 1 million greedy individuals, with different amounts ready to invest -for example, 50% of individuals with $5k or less, 30% with 5k-20k, etc., up to some whales.

Then, making all individuals act greedily, make some individuals be speculative (that is, use a portion of their money to buy LUNA, buy ETH etc., expecting it to go up), while current holders are more incentivized to sell the more they are in profit (say it is probabilistic, so for example, being up 200% gives a higher probability of selling vs. being up 100%).

Then run your simulation and see what happens (note, I don’t know what would happen, because I haven’t fully understood your concept, but I suspect some sort of problem arises -because to be honest, the ‘going up in value no matter what’ sounds unsustainable).

23

as Do Kwon said on twitter reply:

If u set the tax cap to 0.1 it limits the total tax paid in any txn to 0.1 sdr (14 cents)

Also you need to formulate a paramchangeproposal not a textproposal